# Scotland Debate



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 22, 2014)

Interesting guy, came out well on the first TV debate. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25838065.

....and now for listeners in England.

Labour really floundered.
Trident, they all want shot of it.
Finance more important than EU or Â£.
Two undecided members on panel, one SNP and one Labour
All agreed that Cameron was Feart and as UK leader he should debate with Soapy.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 22, 2014)

I have refrained from commenting on what I read, heard and saw in the Scottish media when home for a week earlier this month - and I personally had and overheard some interesting discussions and points of view.  

I'll note that I heard a lot about pressure building on BT to put out their version of the white paper and also pressure on BT to get Cameron to engage in debate with Salmond.

I will however note that I am starting to get asked more often down here about what I think will happen and how I'd vote - as if my view mattered one little jot - so interest in England seems to be increasing.


----------



## AMcC (Jan 22, 2014)

Long way to go yet, and I think you will get a few more big names, coming out and supporting the Yes vote. There has been a couple of retired councillors / trade union guys who, free from party and local politics, have come out recently and backed the yes campaign despite being from Labour backgrounds.


----------



## guest100718 (Jan 22, 2014)

Just close the door on your way out


----------



## 6inchcup (Jan 22, 2014)

just think of the work for our ENGLISH brikkies when we re-build the wall,and we could get it done on the cheap if we do one for WALES as well.


----------



## AMcC (Jan 22, 2014)

So if you two had a vote, Scotland would be on there own.

That might be interesting, how many other British people would vote to separate from Scotland, given a vote ?


----------



## Slime (Jan 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			All agreed that Cameron was *Feart* and as UK leader he should debate with *Soapy*.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry mate, I'm reading this in English, what the hell does that mean?


*Slime*.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 22, 2014)

AMcC said:



			So if you two had a vote, Scotland would be on there own.

That might be interesting, how many other British people would vote to separate from Scotland, given a vote ?
		
Click to expand...

What two?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 22, 2014)

Slime said:



			Sorry mate, I'm reading this in English, what the hell does that mean?


*Slime*.
		
Click to expand...


Feart is frightened/scardey cat.
Lord Soapy is Alex Salmond, after an Oor Willie cast member.


----------



## bluewolf (Jan 23, 2014)

AMcC said:



			So if you two had a vote, Scotland would be on there own.

That might be interesting, how many other British people would vote to separate from Scotland, given a vote ?
		
Click to expand...

Not me.. In fact, the conversation in my house last week was about how quickly we could sell up and move to Scotland if the Yes vote won... Then my Missus checked out the weather and decided that she was having second thoughts....


Actually, in all seriousness, I've spoken to several people recently who would consider moving to Scotland if the Yes vote won. All Northerners though. Maybe we could just move the border south?


----------



## Sharktooth (Jan 23, 2014)

6inchcup said:



			just think of the work for our *ENGLISH* brikkies when we re-build the wall,and we could get it done on the cheap if we do one for WALES as well.
		
Click to expand...

I think you mean Polish, or Romanian...


----------



## AMcC (Jan 23, 2014)

guest100718 said:



			Just close the door on your way out
		
Click to expand...




6inchcup said:



			just think of the work for our ENGLISH brikkies when we re-build the wall,and we could get it done on the cheap if we do one for WALES as well.
		
Click to expand...




SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			What two?
		
Click to expand...

Those two &#128515;


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 23, 2014)

AMcC said:



			Those two &#128515;
		
Click to expand...

Oh - OK


----------



## Waitforme (Jan 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Feart is frightened/scardey cat.
Lord Soapy is Alex Salmond, after an Oor Willie cast member.
		
Click to expand...

Surely Fat Bob would be better suited to Salmond ?


----------



## Crazyface (Jan 23, 2014)

AMcC said:



			So if you two had a vote, Scotland would be on there own.

That might be interesting, how many other *British people* would vote to separate from Scotland, given a vote ?
		
Click to expand...

Just where is this country Britain? It is England-Scotland-Wales-Ireland.


----------



## Alex1975 (Jan 23, 2014)

Crazyface said:



			Just where is this country Britain? It is England-Scotland-Wales-Ireland.
		
Click to expand...


He did not call the country Britain, he referred to British people.... That being the case what was your point?


----------



## Slime (Jan 23, 2014)

Crazyface said:



			Just where is this country Britain? *It is England-Scotland-Wales-Ireland.*

Click to expand...

No it isn't.
It is England, Scotland and Wales. Ireland is not part of Great Britain.

*Slime*.


----------



## Sharktooth (Jan 23, 2014)

25 years ago when I thought I knew everything, but was in fact ill travelled, ill informed and fiercely nationalistic I would have voted for independence. However, now having grown up... Better Off Together.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jan 23, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Not me.. In fact, the conversation in my house last week was about how quickly we could sell up and move to Scotland if the Yes vote won... Then my Missus checked out the weather and decided that she was having second thoughts....


Actually, in all seriousness, I've spoken to several people recently who would consider moving to Scotland if the Yes vote won. All Northerners though. Maybe we could just move the border south?
		
Click to expand...

The yes vote is sounding very more attractive.


----------



## standrew (Jan 23, 2014)

Not interested unless we get rid of the central bank. Id vote to stay with britain if they bloody put match of the day 2 on at 10.20 instead of pish SPL.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 23, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Actually, in all seriousness, I've spoken to several people recently who would consider moving to Scotland if the Yes vote won. All Northerners though. Maybe we could just move the border south?
		
Click to expand...

About 20% of our village are English
The buy oor hooses cheaply then completely lower the tone of the place......








....by putting burglar alarms outside their houses.
16 years I've lived here and one recorded crime [a child's cycle stolen]


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			About 20% of our village are English
The buy oor hooses cheaply then completely lower the tone of the place......








....by putting burglar alarms outside their houses.
16 years I've lived here and one recorded crime [a child's cycle stolen]
		
Click to expand...

...and probably have steering wheel locks on when parked in their own drives or outside of their own houses.


----------



## AMcC (Jan 24, 2014)

AMcC said:



			Long way to go yet, and I think you will get a few more big names, coming out and supporting the Yes vote. There has been a couple of retired councillors / trade union guys who, free from party and local politics, have come out recently and backed the yes campaign despite being from Labour backgrounds.
		
Click to expand...

The following report is in today's evening times,  just what I was mentioning earlier

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/...making-of-scotlandand-labour-149490n.23259193


----------



## Sharktooth (Jan 24, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			About 20% of our village are English
The buy oor hooses cheaply then completely lower the tone of the place......








....by putting burglar alarms outside their houses.
16 years I've lived here and one recorded crime [*a child's cycle stolen*]
		
Click to expand...

How much did you get for it?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 24, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			About 20% of our village are English
The buy oor hooses cheaply then completely lower the tone of the place......








....by putting burglar alarms outside their houses.
16 years I've lived here and one recorded crime [a child's cycle stolen]
		
Click to expand...

Yeah but at least the gene pool is widened a little though


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 24, 2014)

AMcC said:



			The following report is in today's evening times,  just what I was mentioning earlier

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/...making-of-scotlandand-labour-149490n.23259193

Click to expand...

...though from what I heard on QT last night a labour vote - in fact *many* votes can be bought for Â£500.  That I find very depressing - a vote can be bought for Â£10/week.  And Jim Sillars was right.  If a no vote then in 2016 many No voters will be reflecting on what they did..


----------



## MegaSteve (Jan 24, 2014)

Quite a balanced debate on QT helped by the fact that the rather obnoxious Eddie Reader was not to be seen... Or more importantly not heard...

The gents [from the audience] 'question' towards the end rather summed it all up for me...


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jan 24, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			The gents [from the audience] 'question' towards the end rather summed it all up for me...
		
Click to expand...

What was the 'question'?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 24, 2014)

Jim! Sally or Jackie?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 24, 2014)

Sharktooth said:



			How much did you get for it?
		
Click to expand...

I think the child broke it and hid it as he was feart to tell his dad.
[Or swopped it for a Power Ranger.]


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 24, 2014)

There is no doubt that many traditional Labour voters have transferred their Scottish vote to SNP. Probably because the SNP are doing a decent job of running the country and are the only credible party in Scotland at the mo. 

Many folk view this as support for an independent Scotland but it is not.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jan 24, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			What was the 'question'?
		
Click to expand...


In the event of a no vote will that be the end of it...


----------



## AMcC (Jan 24, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Many folk view this as support for an independent Scotland but it is not.
		
Click to expand...

That's the problem in Scotland at the moment, too many people think that a yes vote is a vote for SNP.
A yes vote would probably invigorate Labour as well, once they were free from the shackles of London.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 24, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			In the event of a no vote will that be the end of it...
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely not - for Westminster it will only be the start...


----------



## 6inchcup (Jan 25, 2014)

we in ENGLAND should also have a vote,for years the LABOUR party in SCOTLAND has kept the government in Westminster lob sided add to this the ones in WALES and it is vastly bloated,the problem is these members have a vote on my future in ENGLAND but also have a say in how their countries are run,for years both WALES and SCOTLAND got more per head of my tax revenue than i did,i would vote to brak up the united kingdom and we all should go our own ways,the tax money raised in each country would then be used in that country and not subsidising keeping an ancient language going,it would be tough for a bit but in the long term it would be better for everyone.


----------



## 19thagain (Jan 25, 2014)

6inchcup said:



			we in ENGLAND should also have a vote,for years the LABOUR party in SCOTLAND has kept the government in Westminster lob sided add to this the ones in WALES and it is vastly bloated,the problem is these members have a vote on my future in ENGLAND but also have a say in how their countries are run,for years both WALES and SCOTLAND got more per head of my tax revenue than i did,i would vote to brak up the united kingdom and we all should go our own ways,the tax money raised in each country would then be used in that country and not subsidising keeping an ancient language going,it would be tough for a bit but in the long term it would be better for everyone.
		
Click to expand...


I am not sure if I should say _[/Yes Please .. let us go our own way or (and this is a big puzzle for me) try and work out why England do not want us to leave?

As you state, we are a load of free wheelers up here, using up all England's hard earned cash, getting more back than ever we put in, creating a problem for your right wing politics with our left leanings ..... why oh why, does a right wing prime minister therefore want us to stay?

I know there must be an answer and it is not just our hair colouring.

Could it be our abundance of oil? Never, surely not! Could it be our abundance of water? Never! Could it be our elbow room? Maybe!

No Mr Cup, you will have to help me understand why your country does not want to rid itself of this turd causing you all the problems as you state above._


----------



## stevie_r (Jan 25, 2014)

See here's the thing that gets me about oil, was it solely Scottish money that provided for the R & D and then the task of getting it out of the ground?  I'm not convinced it was you know.


----------



## 6inchcup (Jan 26, 2014)

19thagain said:



			I am not sure if I should say _[/Yes Please .. let us go our own way or (and this is a big puzzle for me) try and work out why England do not want us to leave?

As you state, we are a load of free wheelers up here, using up all England's hard earned cash, getting more back than ever we put in, creating a problem for your right wing politics with our left leanings ..... why oh why, does a right wing prime minister therefore want us to stay?

I know there must be an answer and it is not just our hair colouring.

Could it be our abundance of oil? Never, surely not! Could it be our abundance of water? Never! Could it be our elbow room? Maybe!

No Mr Cup, you will have to help me understand why your country does not want to rid itself of this turd causing you all the problems as you state above._

Click to expand...

_i have nothing against you or anyone from SCOTLAND,my problem is that you have a parliament that can raise its own tax revenue and make your own laws that differ from the ones in ENGLAND you get more money per head from the tax revenue raised in the whole of the BRITISH ISLES but you also have MPS who make decisions for us in ENGLAND and sway the balance of power towards your interests,as for oil who paid for it,would we in ENGLAND be any worse off if we didnt have to subsidise WALES or SCOTLAND and kept all tax revenue to ourselves as opposed to any profit we get from oil,as i said on a major desicion like this a vote should be cast in the whole of the british isles not just SCOTLAND,and only then would a true democratic decision be made._


----------



## Sharktooth (Jan 26, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			See here's the thing that gets me about oil, was it solely Scottish money that provided for the R & D and then the task of getting it out of the ground?  I'm not convinced it was you know.
		
Click to expand...

Finding it. Getting it out of the ground / seabed. Pumping it ashore. Refining it. All very different projects and concepts, but I think you'll find it that it was the yanks who made it happen.


----------



## stevie_r (Jan 26, 2014)

Sharktooth said:



			Finding it. Getting it out of the ground / seabed. Pumping it ashore. Refining it. All very different projects and concepts, but I think you'll find it that it was the yanks who made it happen.
		
Click to expand...

So not the Scots then?


----------



## SocketRocket (Jan 26, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			So not the Scots then?
		
Click to expand...

Nae, it wasnae!


----------



## Sharktooth (Jan 26, 2014)

There's a very good documentary called Crude Brittania which covers the history of oil and gas exploration in the North Sea. Worth watching.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 26, 2014)

My two penny worth  

I don't want us to be apart from Scotland or Wales 

Why - not for political reasons or money reasons 

But because I believe the three countries working together as one is what makes our island great. The ability for us to work together to make the Island great and a force around the world 

This is highlighted more when I worked in the military and worked alongside our welsh and Scottish neighbours - working together to make us the best armed forces in the world 

When it comes to the Olympics - the whole island getting behind every sportsman regardless of what country they were born 

Plus there is the banter between the nations - it's unrivaled in its humour 

We are a great island together all three nations and I would hate to see that split up


----------



## Sharktooth (Jan 26, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			My two penny worth  

I don't want us to be apart from Scotland or Wales 

Why - not for political reasons or money reasons 

But because I believe the three countries working together as one is what makes our island great. The ability for us to work together to make the Island great and a force around the world 

This is highlighted more when I worked in the military and worked alongside our welsh and Scottish neighbours - working together to make us the best armed forces in the world 

When it comes to the Olympics - the whole island getting behind every sportsman regardless of what country they were born 

Plus there is the banter between the nations - it's unrivaled in its humour 

We are a great island together all three nations and I would hate to see that split up
		
Click to expand...

Fair comment, which I agree with and I'm Scottish.

What gets me among those seeking independence is that it's an independence of convenience they want. They want independence but want to keep the currency and passport??? Personally if Scotland get independence, England should just say 'ok, F off then... Go your own way.' If that happens I'll be applying for English citizenship!


----------



## AMcC (Jan 26, 2014)

Latest poll out today shows a narrowing of the gap between yes and no.
Yes 37 %  No 44 % and don't knows 19%.

Also interesting story in today's Herald 

"A FOREIGN Office department ostensibly set up to promote the Scottish Government's interests is being used against it in the independence referendum, diplomatic cables have revealed.  It is understood the FCO has contacted the governments of China, Russia, the US, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the 28 EU nations about the Scottish referendum in a global search for allies who might oppose independence.

One recent cable showed UK embassies being ordered to forward a Westminster paper critical of independence "to their host governments and other local contacts" and then feed their comments back to the Devolution Unit "ASAP".

Maybe indicates the depth Westminster are going to keep us.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 26, 2014)

Begs the question, 
Why are they so desperate to keep us?
A rUK government will be a shoe in for a UKIP/Tory majority.


----------



## 19thagain (Jan 26, 2014)

6inchcup said:



			i have nothing against you or anyone from SCOTLAND,my problem is that you have a parliament that can raise its own tax revenue and make your own laws that differ from the ones in ENGLAND you get more money per head from the tax revenue raised in the whole of the BRITISH ISLES but you also have MPS who make decisions for us in ENGLAND and sway the balance of power towards your interests,as for oil who paid for it,would we in ENGLAND be any worse off if we didnt have to subsidise WALES or SCOTLAND and kept all tax revenue to ourselves as opposed to any profit we get from oil,as i said on a major desicion like this a vote should be cast in the whole of the british isles not just SCOTLAND,and only then would a true democratic decision be made.
		
Click to expand...

Now Mr Cup you have shanked my question into thick rough - why do the right wing English government want to keep Scotland when, as you again state ...  we are beggers getting hand outs from you well off English and upsetting your right wing politics?

Makes one wonder?

I wonder if you will reply with some attention to the question?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 26, 2014)

6inchcup said:



			we in ENGLAND should also have a vote,for years the LABOUR party in SCOTLAND has kept the government in Westminster lob sided add to this the ones in WALES and it is vastly bloated,the problem is these members have a vote on my future in ENGLAND but also have a say in how their countries are run,for years both WALES and SCOTLAND got more per head of my tax revenue than i did,i would vote to brak up the united kingdom and we all should go our own ways,the tax money raised in each country would then be used in that country and not subsidising keeping an ancient language going,it would be tough for a bit but in the long term it would be better for everyone.
		
Click to expand...

LOL - not even all Scots get as vote.  Besides England can't kick Scotland out of the Union - much as some down here might like that.

Anyway - looks like most votes in Scotland so love being with us in the Union that'll they'll vote NO - besides - as the BT campaign say up there - with BT you get the best of both worlds so why change things?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 26, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			My two penny worth  

I don't want us to be apart from Scotland or Wales 

Why - not for political reasons or money reasons 

But because I believe the three countries working together as one is what makes our island great. The ability for us to work together to make the Island great and a force around the world 

This is highlighted more when I worked in the military and worked alongside our welsh and Scottish neighbours - working together to make us the best armed forces in the world 

When it comes to the Olympics - the whole island getting behind every sportsman regardless of what country they were born 

Plus there is the banter between the nations - it's unrivaled in its humour 

We are a great island together all three nations and I would hate to see that split up
		
Click to expand...

I have to say though I hear one hell of a lot of whinging down here about Scots being in positions of influence and power in the UK.  Good that we'll not be hearing so much of that down here after the No vote.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 26, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Begs the question, 
Why are they so desperate to keep us?
A rUK government will be a shoe in for a UKIP/Tory majority.
		
Click to expand...

And after a NO vote, and a the coming of a Tory/UKIP coalition government in Westminster in 2016 general election, there are going to be a lot of frustrated voters in Scotland knowing that they can't really complain about it,


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 26, 2014)

19thagain said:



			Now Mr Cup you have shanked my question into thick rough - why do the right wing English government want to keep Scotland when, as you again state ...  we are beggers getting hand outs from you well off English and upsetting your right wing politics?

Makes one wonder?

I wonder if you will reply with some attention to the question?
		
Click to expand...

Why indeed *do *we down here want to keep Scotland in the Union, considering you lot up there get Â£1600 a head spending more than those of us in the rUK AND students don't pay fees AND you don't pay prescription charges AND there is free elderly care - and these are just the things that we know about.


----------



## 19thagain (Jan 27, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Why indeed *do *we down here want to keep Scotland in the Union, considering you lot up there get Â£1600 a head spending more than those of us in the rUK AND students don't pay fees AND you don't pay prescription charges AND there is free elderly care - and these are just the things that we know about.
		
Click to expand...


Now be fair Mr Hogan ..... I asked that question so I expect you down there, who have all this big burden of us up here, to answer it, not just agree with me!

Why not just let us go - you know it is the sensible thing.

Just convince your pals in government that your case embraces all the facts and we can just walk away.

You must find YOUR government so annoying when they cannot see what you see!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 27, 2014)

19thagain said:



			Now be fair Mr Hogan ..... I asked that question so I expect you down there, who have all this big burden of us up here, to answer it, not just agree with me!

Why not just let us go - you know it is the sensible thing.

Just convince your pals in government that your case embraces all the facts and we can just walk away.

You must find YOUR government so annoying when they cannot see what you see!
		
Click to expand...

What I can see as a voter in England is that I'll be blowed (is that any better than I'll be bu**ered - dunno - mods will tell me if I am off path) - anyway - I'll be blowed if Scotland by staying in the Union is going to be able to _have it's cake and eat it_ - as BT suggest Scotland will have with their 'Best of both worlds' offering - aye right.

And thing is @19thagain - we can't get rid of you lot   So if you stick with the rest of us you are going to have to start marching to the same tune as the rest of us...


----------



## 6inchcup (Jan 27, 2014)

19thagain said:



			Now Mr Cup you have shanked my question into thick rough - why do the right wing English government want to keep Scotland when, as you again state ...  we are beggers getting hand outs from you well off English and upsetting your right wing politics?

Makes one wonder?

I wonder if you will reply with some attention to the question?
		
Click to expand...

 i would not class the government as right wing a bit right of centre thats about all,i dont know why they are wasting time debating this question in the commons but according to the tv yesterday on a ugov poll over 52% of those in ENGLAND who answered the question voted to cut SCOTLAND lose and let them fend for themselves but only after they have paid the billions off the debt the owe the government.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 27, 2014)

6inchcup said:



			i would not class the government as right wing a bit right of centre thats about all,i dont know why they are wasting time debating this question in the commons but according to the tv yesterday on a ugov poll over 52% of those in ENGLAND who answered the question voted to cut SCOTLAND lose and let them fend for themselves but only after they have paid the billions off the debt the owe the government.
		
Click to expand...

But we can't cut Scotland loose - they can choose to stay with us and have the best of both...so BT say - but we can't vote for them to go.

And I would note that the political 'centre' ground in Scotland is probably not coincident with that of England.  So the 'bit right of centre' Tories may not look to be quite so close to the centre from a Scottish viewpoint.


----------



## 6inchcup (Jan 27, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But we can't cut Scotland loose - they can choose to stay with us and have the best of both...so BT say - but we can't vote for them to go.

And I would note that the political 'centre' ground in Scotland is probably not coincident with that of England.  So the 'bit right of centre' Tories may not look to be quite so close to the centre from a Scottish viewpoint.
		
Click to expand...

if they vote yes the LABOUR party will be decimated,so the TORY vote would give us a proper right wing government without the need for the mamby pamby LIBERALS slowing things up,i pray they vote yes but if they vote no then things will have to change.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 27, 2014)

6inchcup said:



			...but if they vote no then things will have to change.
		
Click to expand...

In what way - change from a Holyrood or Westminster perspective?


----------



## 19thagain (Jan 27, 2014)

I have now studied BOTH your replies and I don't see an answer to my question ...

Why are the English Government hell bent on retaining Scotland within the Union?

Come on, give me a straightforward answer not just, what will happen if BT results or how unfair the Jocks currently are.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 27, 2014)

19thagain said:



			I have now studied BOTH your replies and I don't see an answer to my question ...

Why are the English Government hell bent on retaining Scotland within the Union?
		
Click to expand...

I don't know.  BT and Cameron just says it's better for the union - as well as Scotland.




			Come on, give me a straightforward answer not just, what will happen if BT results or how unfair the Jocks currently are.
		
Click to expand...

BT are saying 'Scotland gets best of both worlds if Scotland votes NO'  What's you question again - sorry...

I'm not sure that a 'vote NO for a 'best of both worlds' and keep things are they are' is something many folks down south are going to be completely happy with.  Unless that is changes happen down south to bring England closer to Scotland in respect of tuition fees, prescriptions etc and the per head central government grant.  But for as much as I can't see the Tories addressing the former (tuition fees etc) - I can see them looking to revise the central government (Westminster) grant to Holyrood - and I can;t see it getting revised upwards.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 28, 2014)

Could be the other way round as England seem to be following many of the Scottish governments plans.
Smoking in public places, minimum alcohol pricing, free school dinners etc.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 28, 2014)

19thagain said:



			I have now studied BOTH your replies and I don't see an answer to my question ...

Why are the *English Government* hell bent on retaining Scotland within the Union?

Come on, give me a straightforward answer not just, what will happen if BT results or how unfair the Jocks currently are.
		
Click to expand...

No such thing, like unicorns and Hibs Scottish cup victories.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			No such thing, like unicorns and Hibs Scottish cup victories.
		
Click to expand...

Truth is that I suggest we will have to wait a fair bit to hear what the Westminster government and Cameron think, because they have a large constituency of voters in England (especially) who may not necessarily like what they hear Cameron would have to say to Scotland about the benefits of Scotland staying in the union, and what Westminster would further offer Scotland in respect of powers.  Cameron would I think be walking on eggshells were he to seriously start selling the benefits of the union to Scottish voters.

Vote NO to stay in the Union and have the Best of both Worlds.  Plus - we'll give you *more *but not take away *anything * that you already have.  

Yup - that pitch might well get my vote if I lived in Scotland.  What's not to like?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Truth is that I suggest we will have to wait a fair bit to hear what the Westminster government and Cameron think, because they have a large constituency of voters in England (especially) who may not necessarily like what they hear Cameron would have to say to Scotland about the benefits of Scotland staying in the union, and what Westminster would further offer Scotland in respect of powers.  Cameron would I think be walking on eggshells were he to seriously start selling the benefits of the union to Scottish voters.

Vote NO to stay in the Union and have the Best of both Worlds.  Plus - we'll give you *more *but not take away *anything * that you already have.  

Yup - that pitch might well get my vote if I lived in Scotland.  What's not to like?
		
Click to expand...

I think it no longer matters what Cameron/Milliband/Darling AN Other have to say,unless Cameron is prepared to debate with the wee fat jambo.Momentum is gathering for YES, polls are narrowing and once that happens they don't usually reverse.Get Henry McLeish or a big player in Labour to come out for Yes and the deal is done.

I seriously can't see any other outcome except YES now.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I think it no longer matters what Cameron/Milliband/Darling AN Other have to say,unless Cameron is prepared to debate with the wee fat jambo.Momentum is gathering for YES, polls are narrowing and once that happens they don't usually reverse.Get Henry McLeish or a big player in Labour to come out for Yes and the deal is done.

I seriously can't see any other outcome except YES now.
		
Click to expand...

The most recent poll does reflect a narrowing of the gap.  If fear gets you on this then you'll already be saying NO.  It's the undecideds not put off by the BT fear and not hearing much positive about staying in the union.  The 'look at the great things we've done in the past as a union' card is not a great one to play at the moment.  The past is just that.  

I think Cameron is going to have to debate with wee Eck - and Eck will have Daphne right beside him - and I think that plays OK in Scotland.  Who will Cameron have at his side - Teresa May?  Hmmm.  Teresa my dear - intelligent you may be and powerfully glamorous you may wish to dress - but you ain't Maggie (no not the roofing one recently departed).


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 28, 2014)

Daphne ho ho.

The SNP seem to be filling up with the  Broons cast.

Lord Soapy, Daphne and I suppose the finance minister is Horace


----------



## ger147 (Jan 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The most recent poll does reflect a narrowing of the gap.  If fear gets you on this then you'll already be saying NO.  It's the undecideds not put off by the BT fear and not hearing much positive about staying in the union.  The 'look at the great things we've done in the past as a union' card is not a great one to play at the moment.  The past is just that.  

I think Cameron is going to have to debate with wee Eck - and Eck will have Daphne right beside him - and I think that plays OK in Scotland.  Who will Cameron have at his side - Teresa May?  Hmmm.  Teresa my dear - intelligent you may be and powerfully glamorous you may wish to dress - but you ain't Maggie (no not the roofing one recently departed).
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely no chance of Dave going head to head on TV with Alex, never going to happen.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Daphne ho ho.

The SNP seem to be filling up with the  Broons cast.

Lord Soapy, Daphne and I suppose the finance minister is Horace
		
Click to expand...

Well in Jim Sillars the yes campaign certainly has it's Soapy Souter - and indeed Swinney aka Horace.  Maybe Margo is Maggie - but fa's grandpa though - and Hen and Joe?  And the Bairn and the twins? - well let's welcome to the family playing the twins - Charlie and Craig Reid.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 28, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Absolutely no chance of Dave going head to head on TV with Alex, never going to happen.
		
Click to expand...

Why you think? Saying No is not just staying in the union and rejecting independence - it's accepting that Westminster has a significant part to play in the lives of those living in Scotland for ever and a day.  So surely for the thoughts about how Westminster will deal with Scotland post a NO vote it is appropriate to hear from the Prime Minister of that parliament.  If I were thinking about voting NO I'd want to hear these things from the mouth of organ grinder Cameron and not the monkey Darling - else who do NO voters hold to account if things change in an unexpected way post a NO vote - Ally Darls?


----------



## ger147 (Jan 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Why you think?
		
Click to expand...

I just know it won't happen. What you, I or anyone else wants is neither here nor there, it won't happen.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 28, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I just know it won't happen. What you, I or anyone else wants is neither here nor there, it won't happen.
		
Click to expand...

Well I don;t think BT should be able to get away with that.  What are they afraid of?  that folk in Scotland will suddenly twig that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is English - and has a posh voice.  And that there is a good chance that he or someone like him will be PM of the UK on a regular basis.  Gosh - they never realised that?  So what's the big deal?  It sounds to me like BT are afraid that if DC debates with Salmond - or even if DC is interviewed by say Jim Naughtie in front of an audience - then he'll be exposed.  Well if there is a risk that he'd be exposed then wouldn't voters want to understand that ex[posure.

This is seeming to me to be an Achilles heel for BT.  So let's see how things develop over coming months - though at some point is there not a freeze on campaigning or something some months before the vote?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 29, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25930075

That's a yes from Salmond and a no from Whitehall then!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25930075

That's a yes from Salmond and a no from Whitehall then!
		
Click to expand...


Well reading what the governor of BoE is quoted as saying - he clearly doesn't close the door on currency union between an independent Scotland and rUK - and actually by saying care would be necessary about setting down the foundations he is implying that it absolutely is possible.  May be tricky - but possible - though Scotland would have to cede some powers and both Scotland and rUK would have to be flexible.  So we need to know how flexible rUK would be - speak up Mr Osborne.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 29, 2014)

Mr Osborne like Mr Cameron is FEART.

They are still trying to work out what a 9.5% drop in sterling will do if they continue this line of thought.

Mr Carney has it spot on. [I think]


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jan 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Mr Osborne like Mr Cameron is FEART.

They are still trying to work out what a 9.5% drop in sterling will do if they continue this line of thought.

Mr Carney has it spot on. [I think]
		
Click to expand...

Blethering on again about a 9.5% drop in sterling! 

I have previously asked you to substantiate the point but each time you have failed to provide any answer with a basis in fact. You really should consider a career in politics, but only in Holyrood. The last thing we need in Westminster is yet another Scot trying to enforce the minority's wishes upon the relatively silent majority.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jan 29, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I think it no longer matters what Cameron/Milliband/Darling AN Other have to say,unless Cameron is prepared to debate with the wee fat jambo.Momentum is gathering for YES, polls are narrowing and once that happens they don't usually reverse.Get Henry McLeish or a big player in Labour to come out for Yes and the deal is done.

I seriously can't see any other outcome except YES now.
		
Click to expand...

And you, Sir are seriously deluded!

What you mean is that you don't want to see any other outcome.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 29, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Blethering on again about a 9.5% drop in sterling! 

I have previously asked you to substantiate the point but each time you have failed to provide any answer with a basis in fact. You really should consider a career in politics, but only in Holyrood. The last thing we need in Westminster is yet another Scot trying to enforce the minority's wishes upon the relatively silent majority.
		
Click to expand...

Seemingly an independent Scotland may legally walk away from their share of the debt accrued by the UK government if the rUK do not allow them to use sterling [by their choice]
Don't be confused that the 'Bank of England' really is THE Bank of England.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jan 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Seemingly an independent Scotland may legally walk away from their share of the debt accrued by the UK government if the rUK do not allow them to use sterling [by their choice]
Don't be confused that the 'Bank of England' really is THE Bank of England.
		
Click to expand...

Fear not dear friend. Based upon your previous utterances on economic and financial matters I am certain sure that it is not me who is confused about the role and standing of the Bank of England.

If it were to serve as the bank of last resort for an independent Scottish banking system then most, if not all, economic decisions would have to be ceded from Edinburgh to Westminster thereby rather defeating the object of independence.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 29, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Fear not dear friend. Based upon your previous utterances on economic and financial matters I am certain sure that it is not me who is confused about the role and standing of the Bank of England.

If it were to serve as the bank of last resort for an independent Scottish banking system then most, if not all, economic decisions would have to be ceded from Edinburgh to Westminster thereby rather defeating the object of independence.
		
Click to expand...

Where about does Westminster come into this equation?
Remember that the Bank of England [UK] is an independent body.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 29, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Fear not dear friend. Based upon your previous utterances on economic and financial matters I am certain sure that it is not me who is confused about the role and standing of the Bank of England.

If it were to serve as the bank of last resort for an independent Scottish banking system then most, if not all, economic decisions would have to be ceded from Edinburgh to Westminster thereby rather defeating the object of independence.
		
Click to expand...

Sounds like there would be a joint committee.  After all were Scotland to leave the union the business and economic ties between Scotland and the rUK are such that it would be in the interests of the rUK to work closely with Scotland on economic matters such as interest rates.  The last think the rUK would want, given that the economies would be so closely integrated in many ways, would be for the Scottish economy to collapse as that would have a very significant impact of rUK.  For pragmatic economic reasons it would seem to me that the rUK would want to work closely with Scotland to ensure the best for both economies.  

And that is not to say that rUK would be supporting Scotland - but that they would work together.  After all the economies must be reasonably well aligned at the moment so it shouldn't be that difficult to keep them reasonably well aligned.  There would have to be flexibility on the part of the rUK - and some BoE decisions might not fully suit the rUK in the short term and that would no doubt cause some disquiet if not resentment.  But were the rUK to ignore Scotland's needs and Scotland goes down the dunny - then there is a risk that that would drag rUK down as well.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jan 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Where about does Westminster come into this equation?
Remember that the Bank of England [UK] is an independent body.
		
Click to expand...

Ultimately answerable to UK Government.

I really do wonder if you have actually studied Mr Carney's remarks regarding the costs to any country in a currency union of having to forsake its monetary policies and control of interest rates.

This, after all, is the same for members of the Eurozone and was the main reason for the UK not joining. Still with Salmond's record you could probably be better off with Westminster determining Scottish monetary policy.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jan 29, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Sounds like there would be a joint committee.  After all were Scotland to leave the union the business and economic ties between Scotland and the rUK are such that it would be in the interests of the rUK to work closely with Scotland on economic matters such as interest rates.  The last think the rUK would want, given that the economies would be so closely integrated in many ways, would be for the Scottish economy to collapse as that would have a very significant impact of rUK.  For pragmatic economic reasons it would seem to me that the rUK would want to work closely with Scotland to ensure the best for both economies.  

And that is not to say that rUK would be supporting Scotland - but that they would work together.  After all the economies must be reasonably well aligned at the moment so it shouldn't be that difficult to keep them reasonably well aligned.  There would have to be flexibility on the part of the rUK - and some BoE decisions might not fully suit the rUK in the short term and that would no doubt cause some disquiet if not resentment.  But were the rUK to ignore Scotland's needs and Scotland goes down the dunny - then there is a risk that that would drag rUK down as well.
		
Click to expand...

A country with a population of 50 million + and a far larger economy is in any currency union going to dictate to its much smaller partner. Just look at the Eurozone, do not Germany and France dominate the decision making? Of course they do and so it would be with sterling.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 29, 2014)

OK I shall keep this simple.
'Westminster' [aka BoE] says no to the Â£.
Scotland converts all of it's Scottish pounds into euros.

Euro booms Â£ busts.
PS Anyone checked Â£/Euro rates lately.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jan 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			OK I shall keep this simple.
'Westminster' [aka BoE] says no to the Â£.
Scotland converts all of it's Scottish pounds into euros.

Euro booms Â£ busts.
PS Anyone checked Â£/Euro rates lately.
		
Click to expand...

Short term exchange rate movements are relatively unimportant compared with economic performance. The UK's economy in 2013 grew much more than that of any in the Eurozone and this forecast to again be the case in 2014.

This would have been very unlikely if our economy and monetary policy had been subject to ECB controls.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jan 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			OK I shall keep this simple.
'Westminster' [aka BoE] says no to the Â£.
Scotland converts all of it's Scottish pounds into euros.

Euro booms Â£ busts.
PS Anyone checked Â£/Euro rates lately.
		
Click to expand...

The rates look very stable to me.

Another simple analogy:

Scotland converts all of it's Pounds to Euros.
Euro goes bust (High possibility) .  Pounds soars (Quite likely)


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 29, 2014)

Things hotting up.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 29, 2014)

Old Skier said:



View attachment 8954


Things hotting up.
		
Click to expand...

...and I always thought North Devon was quiet a genteel place.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 29, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Ultimately answerable to UK Government.

I really do wonder if you have actually studied Mr Carney's remarks regarding the costs to any country in a currency union of having to forsake its monetary policies and control of interest rates.
		
Click to expand...

Would that not also be the case for one of the main alternatives - joining the euro.   And at the moment Scotland has not a great deal of say in monetary policy anyway - and with a NO will that change?  Haven't heard anything from BT or westminster suggesting it would.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 29, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			A country with a population of 50 million + and a far larger economy is in any currency union going to dictate to its much smaller partner.
		
Click to expand...

So pretty much as happens today?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 29, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			The rates look very stable to me.

Another simple analogy:

Scotland converts all of it's Pounds to Euros.
Euro goes bust (High possibility) .  Pounds soars (Quite likely)
		
Click to expand...

Which assumes that following a YES vote and Scotland leaving the union, the rUK and BoE together decide against any form of monetary union with Scotland and Scotland then join the euro. And they make that decision knowing - 'as you do' - that there is a high possibility of the euro going bust - potentially sending Scotland to the knackers yard with the serious impact that that event would have on the rUK economy.  So given these potential serious consequences on the rUK economy would rUK take the risk - or would they take the pragmatic route and tie Scotland and rUK together under the one same currency - with BoE policy considering the economies of both Scotland and the rUK when setting interest rates etc.

So there is a question that has to be answered by Westminster about what would be preferred following a YES vote.  Lots of noise from some parts of Westminster about there being little or no chance of Scotland 'being allowed' to adopt the Â£Â£ (though it's Scotland's Â£Â£ as well let's not forget - it's not owned by rUK).  Fine to say 'no chance' in lead up to the vote - but I'm not so sure that that would be the thinking in Westminster and BoE post a YES vote.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jan 29, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So pretty much as happens today?
		
Click to expand...

Utterly wrong.

What happens today is that the minority very often dictates. Remember only once since WW II has there been a Labour government elected without relying upon Scottish votes. That plus the disproportionate amount of State funding that is spent north of the border means you could not be wider of the mark.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jan 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Which assumes that following a YES vote and Scotland leaving the union, the rUK and BoE together decide against any form of monetary union with Scotland and Scotland then join the euro. And they make that decision knowing - 'as you do' - that there is a high possibility of the euro going bust - potentially sending Scotland to the knackers yard with the serious impact that that event would have on the rUK economy.  So given these potential serious consequences on the rUK economy would rUK take the risk - or would they take the pragmatic route and tie Scotland and rUK together under the one same currency - with BoE policy considering the economies of both Scotland and the rUK when setting interest rates etc.

So there is a question that has to be answered by Westminster about what would be preferred following a YES vote.  Lots of noise from some parts of Westminster about there being little or no chance of Scotland 'being allowed' to adopt the Â£Â£ (though it's Scotland's Â£Â£ as well let's not forget - it's not owned by rUK).  Fine to say 'no chance' in lead up to the vote - but I'm not so sure that that would be the thinking in Westminster and BoE post a YES vote.
		
Click to expand...

Scotland only has part ownership of the Â£ until they walk away from it.


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Which assumes that following a YES vote and Scotland leaving the union, the rUK and BoE together decide against any form of monetary union with Scotland and Scotland then join the euro. And they make that decision knowing - 'as you do' - that there is a high possibility of the euro going bust - potentially sending Scotland to the knackers yard with the serious impact that that event would have on the rUK economy.  So given these potential serious consequences on the rUK economy would rUK take the risk - or would they take the pragmatic route and tie Scotland and rUK together under the one same currency - with BoE policy considering the economies of both Scotland and the rUK when setting interest rates etc.

So there is a question that has to be answered by Westminster about what would be preferred following a YES vote.  Lots of noise from some parts of Westminster about there being little or no chance of Scotland 'being allowed' to adopt the Â£Â£ (though it's Scotland's Â£Â£ as well let's not forget - it's not owned by rUK).  Fine to say 'no chance' in lead up to the vote - but I'm not so sure that that would be the thinking in Westminster and BoE post a YES vote.
		
Click to expand...

It appears Mark Carney disagrees wit you on pretty much all aspects this (similarity of economy, Scotland using Â£ etc), perhaps we should get him a username here so you can keep him right!! 

As for the BoE being independent of Westminster, utter nonsense. Carney was hand picked by the Govt for the role and there are numerous areas where they are either answerable (inflation etc) or influenced heavily (financial regulation) by the Gov't.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jan 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			A country with a population of 50 million + and a far larger economy is in any financial and political union going to dictate to its much smaller partner.

A wee fix, just to keep you straight
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			...and I always thought North Devon was quiet a genteel place.
		
Click to expand...

Up North - we stick to VW campers down here


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Utterly wrong.

What happens today is that the minority very often dictates. Remember only once since WW II has there been a Labour government elected without relying upon Scottish votes. That plus the disproportionate amount of State funding that is spent north of the border means you could not be wider of the mark.
		
Click to expand...

...and that situation will continue following a NO vote.  That's not great news for English voters.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			A country with a population of 50 million + and a far larger economy is in any currency union going to dictate to its much smaller partner. Just look at the Eurozone, do not Germany and France dominate the decision making? Of course they do and so it would be with sterling.
		
Click to expand...

I agree with this, and any YES campaigner who doesn't is wasting time-leave that to the politicians.

any indy Scotland wanting to use the Â£ will have to accept a smaller role in the partnership of any currency union, but the word partnership can't be ignored.The noises coming out of the treasury yesterday claimed any currency union is 'unlikely' but that's politiking.As confirmed last week by the treasury, all of Scotlands proportion of debt will be guaranteed by the treasury in any event, meaning if there's no currency union and Scotland has to walk away from the currency, we also walk away from 10% liability of total debt of UK-about Â£110 Billion.And the value of the Â£ is also reduced by a %, meaning the devaluing of the Â£, something no govt will want on their watch.

so the simple answer but taking a long way round is there will be a currency union when Scotland votes yes, The central bank will have over all rule over interest rates etc, but Scotland will have a veto within parameters agreed...nothing radical, both sides will want it to work so there will be no nastiness onc things settle down.

So, rUK has the Â£ zone as their trump card and Scotland will have to suck on it a wee bit.Scotland has coulport as their trump card and England will have to suck on that a wee bit.Give and take chaps, give and take.

fwiw, I'd want Scotland out of the Â£, out of EU,out of NATO and a clean slate, but thats a wee bit too radical.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			so the simple answer but taking a long way round is there will be a currency union when Scotland votes yes, The central bank will have over all rule over interest rates etc, but Scotland will have a veto within parameters agreed...nothing radical, both sides will want it to work so there will be no nastiness onc things settle down.
		
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree that following a YES vote that this would seem to be what the rUK would do - why wouldn't they - it is the sensible pragmatic thing to do.  What we hear from the NO campaign and Westminster over this issue is IMO all a smokescreen to raise uncertainty in those considering a YES vote.  A smokescreen covering a pragmatic reality.  

Ask Westminster what it would do following a YES on this matter? At the moment the answer is either that a YES won't happen (which avoids the question completely) or a load of disingenuous avoidance of the probable truth - a truth that Westminster dare not speak.

If voters know up front of the vote of the likely currency arrangements, and the impact Scotland ceding some fiscal powers to Westminster would have - they can decide whether that is acceptable - or whether it undermines the whole notion of independence for them.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I absolutely agree that following a YES vote that this would seem to be what the rUK would do - why wouldn't they - it is the sensible pragmatic thing to do.  What we hear from the NO campaign and Westminster over this issue is IMO all a smokescreen to raise uncertainty in those considering a YES vote.  A smokescreen covering a pragmatic reality.  

Ask Westminster what it would do following a YES on this matter? At the moment the answer is either that a YES won't happen (which avoids the question completely) or a load of disingenuous avoidance of the probable truth - a truth that Westminster dare not speak.

If voters know up front of the vote of the likely currency arrangements, and the impact Scotland ceding some fiscal powers to Westminster would have - they can decide whether that is acceptable - or whether it undermines the whole notion of independence for them.
		
Click to expand...

Never going to happen.Once you accept that yes is possible and you plan accordingly, the public perception changes and even more momentum gathers behind YES.All of which I accept as part of the game.The public game.But lets not kid ourselves...initial discussions and parameters have been laid down in the event of the inevitable yes victory.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

Here's a quick thought on the +'s for England in the event of YES winning.

A renewed and + projection of English nationalism...just now it can come across incorrectly as right wing and introverted.This presents the opportunity of redressing that falsehood

Increase exports for balance of payments on import/export.

No more block grant

no more west lothian question, which is absurd


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I absolutely agree that following a YES vote that this would seem to be what the rUK would do - why wouldn't they - it is the sensible pragmatic thing to do.  What we hear from the NO campaign and Westminster over this issue is IMO all a smokescreen to raise uncertainty in those considering a YES vote.  A smokescreen covering a pragmatic reality.  

Ask Westminster what it would do following a YES on this matter? At the moment the answer is either that a YES won't happen (which avoids the question completely) or a load of disingenuous avoidance of the probable truth - a truth that Westminster dare not speak.

If voters know up front of the vote of the likely currency arrangements, and the impact Scotland ceding some fiscal powers to Westminster would have - they can decide whether that is acceptable - or whether it undermines the whole notion of independence for them.
		
Click to expand...

Have you read Mark Carney's comments from yesterday?

That is not from Westminster (albeit always an influence as I've said) but more from an economy management perspective.

Playing Devils advocate for a minute.......

If those voting Yes are happy to have their interest rates and therefore, to a degree, economy, managed by BoE are you not concerned that their primary concern is going to be how macro-economic policy and interest affects the remaining UK and the policy of the governing party therein rather than Scotland?

If Scotland is in a position through either rapid growth or a downturn would you be comfortable that one of the main tools of managing the economy is unavailable to you?


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Why would anybody vote for something when they have not been given all of the facts and pros and cons.

Does nobody find it strange that the British Government allowed the fat haggis to go ahead with this without major facts about what will or will not happen if Scotland becomes independant.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Have you read Mark Carney's comments from yesterday?
		
Click to expand...

I did.I wonder if many folk actually did, or are they relying on the interpretation applied by Darling et al?

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...currency-union-means-loss-of-powers-1-3286692



NWJocko said:



			Playing Devils advocate for a minute.......

If those voting Yes are happy to have their interest rates and therefore, to a degree, economy, managed by BoE are you not concerned that their primary concern is going to be how macro-economic policy and interest affects the remaining UK and the policy of the governing party therein rather than Scotland?

If Scotland is in a position through either rapid growth or a downturn would you be comfortable that one of the main tools of managing the economy is unavailable to you?
		
Click to expand...

I can't forsee a period where interest rates are going to be massively different in Scotland/England...where would the benefot for either side be?

bookies aren't usually wrong-
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/arti..._100_to_enter_currency_union_50_1_not_to.html


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I did.I wonder if many folk actually did, or are they relying on the interpretation applied by Darling et al?

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...currency-union-means-loss-of-powers-1-3286692



I can't forsee a period where interest rates are going to be massively different in Scotland/England...where would the benefot for either side be?

bookies aren't usually wrong-
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/arti..._100_to_enter_currency_union_50_1_not_to.html

Click to expand...

Any comments on this will be interpreted by both sides you're correct.  What was interesting was when he talked about Scotland having to "cede partial Sovereignty" in order to enter a currency union.  I can't imagine that's what the pro-independence have in mind?

In terms of interest rates, SiLH is incorrect in that the economies are "sufficiently aligned"......

The make up (by GDP) of both economies post separation are markedly different and therefore are unlikely to behave in the same way.

If, presented with the economic data available, you were asked to build a macro-economic forecasting model you would segment the 2 countries without doubt.

Not to say it won't happen, I just think that its odd that a country would want to be independent yet not have full control over it's economy (for better or worse)?

I really am not a particular advocate/campaigner for either side, just interested.


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Why would anybody vote for something when they have not been given all of the facts and pros and cons.

Does nobody find it strange that the British Government allowed the fat haggis to go ahead with this without major facts about what will or will not happen if Scotland becomes independant.
		
Click to expand...

Fat Haggis 

It's a good point, all elections are somewhat a leap of faith based on manifesto's etc however the scale of the change this vote could create is not reflected in the depth of information you would expect on both sides.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Why would anybody vote for something when they have not been given all of the facts and pros and cons.

Does nobody find it strange that the British Government allowed the fat haggis to go ahead with this without major facts about what will or will not happen if Scotland becomes independant.
		
Click to expand...

Like Westminster being honest with voters in Scotland about whether or not rUK would seek to reach agreement with an independent Scotland on 'monetary union' if that is what the Scottish government sought following a YES vote.  Strikes me that Westminster knows that they would do so, but refuse to admit it just in case that encouraged some Scots to vote YES.  So Westminster are playing a childish game rather than just stating what their preferred option would be in the circumstances of an independent Scotland coming asking.

Just tell the voters up front on this and let them make their mind up if it's acceptable or not.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Never going to happen.Once you accept that yes is possible and you plan accordingly, the public perception changes and even more momentum gathers behind YES.All of which I accept as part of the game.The public game.But lets not kid ourselves...initial discussions and parameters have been laid down in the event of the inevitable yes victory.
		
Click to expand...

They must have - the vote is only 8months away.  What the gov of the BoE was saying makes clear that they must be doing their preparatory work on what an independent Scotland would have to cede and how it would work.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Like Westminster being honest with voters in Scotland about whether or not rUK would seek to reach agreement with an independent Scotland on 'monetary union' if that is what the Scottish government sought following a YES vote.  Strikes me that Westminster knows that they would do so, but refuse to admit it just in case that encouraged some Scots to vote YES.  So Westminster are playing a childish game rather than just stating what their preferred option would be in the circumstances of an independent Scotland coming asking.

Just tell the voters up front on this and let them make their mind up if it's acceptable or not.
		
Click to expand...

Why should Westminster come clean when fat Haggis appears not to have a clue about how things are going to progress IF there is a yes vote.

If those who want a yes vote really want independence fine, become truly independant and break the apron strings but as someone looking in it appears that they still want the protection of Britain, Europe and NATO but are not willing to give anything back.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			.initial discussions and parameters have been laid down in the event of the inevitable yes victory.
		
Click to expand...

:lol::rofl:


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Like Westminster being honest with voters in Scotland about whether or not rUK would seek to reach agreement with an independent Scotland on 'monetary union' if that is what the Scottish government sought following a YES vote.  Strikes me that Westminster knows that they would do so, but refuse to admit it just in case that encouraged some Scots to vote YES.  So Westminster are playing a childish game rather than just stating what their preferred option would be in the circumstances of an independent Scotland coming asking.

Just tell the voters up front on this and let them make their mind up if it's acceptable or not.
		
Click to expand...

Why does it "strike you" that Westminster would enter a monetary union with Scotland?

Or is just your supposition meaning your extrapolation of them playing a "childish game" is based on what?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Why should Westminster come clean when fat Haggis appears not to have a clue about how things are going to progress IF there is a yes vote.
		
Click to expand...

Because the matter of 'monetary union' from the rUK perspective is something for Westminster to make their position clear on - it is not something the Salmond et al can make a statement on - other than give their opinion.  That's why they should come clean on it.  The Scottish electorate can separately decide on what they make of the YES campaign view on what an iScot would do following a YES.

I also note that on the EU membership matter the view is forming that the EU would take a similarly pragmatic view on an independent Scotland joining if it sought membership, and would seek the line of least resistance and that minimised issue and risks - and that line is accept request.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Because the matter of 'monetary union' from the rUK perspective is something for Westminster to make their position clear on - it is not something the Salmond et al can make a statement on - other than give their opinion.  That's why they should come clean on it.  The Scottish electorate can separately decide on what they make of the YES campaign view on what an iScot would do following a YES.

I also note that on the EU membership matter the view is forming that the EU would take a similarly pragmatic view on an independent Scotland joining if it sought membership, and would seek the line of least resistance and that minimised issue and risks - and that line is accept request.
		
Click to expand...

Westminster will gauge Britains reaction if any tom dick or harry that lives in Scotland votes Yes and act accordingly. From the general feeling that is appearing on many social media sites the reaction will be I fear, "you've made your bed " etc.  You obviously will live happily ever after no matter the outcome


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Why does it "strike you" that Westminster would enter a monetary union with Scotland?

Or is just your supposition meaning your extrapolation of them playing a "childish game" is based on what?
		
Click to expand...

Westminster aren't playing any childish games, they're playing _the_ game.One of trying to convince voters to vote no by casting doubt in their minds as to what will happen post yes...what currency will you have?How will you pay your mortgage?how will you be paid?YOU'LL HAVE NO MONEY. All that kind of stuff.Absolute nonsense but in line with the nonsense from BT up until now.Project Fear.

you'll note that not one person, from Treasury,Govt,BT have categorically said that there will be no Â£ zone.And the reason?Because there will be a currency zone.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Westminster aren't playing any childish games, they're playing _the_ game.One of trying to convince voters to vote no by casting doubt in their minds as to what will happen post yes...what currency will you have?How will you pay your mortgage?how will you be paid?YOU'LL HAVE NO MONEY. All that kind of stuff.Absolute nonsense but in line with the nonsense from BT up until now.Project Fear.

you'll note that not one person, from Treasury,Govt,BT have categorically said that there will be no Â£ zone.And the reason?Because there will be a currency zone.
		
Click to expand...

And the fat haggis on the other hand is telling everyone the whole truth and nothing but the truth.  You'll tell me you believed Braveheart next.


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Westminster aren't playing any childish games, they're playing _the_ game.One of trying to convince voters to vote no by casting doubt in their minds as to what will happen post yes...what currency will you have?How will you pay your mortgage?how will you be paid?YOU'LL HAVE NO MONEY. All that kind of stuff.Absolute nonsense but in line with the nonsense from BT up until now.Project Fear.

you'll note that not one person, from Treasury,Govt,BT have categorically said that there will be no Â£ zone.And the reason?Because there will be a currency zone.
		
Click to expand...

I agree.

My point is, why would you, as an indpendent country, want control over currency, interest rates and economy controlled by somebody else?

Not a game of politicking, really just interested in the motivation from pro "independence" to have a relaince on another country from an economical perspective?

Initially at least I can't see any other option.  I wouldn't be comfortable with it if I'd voted Yes though.......


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Westminster aren't playing any childish games, they're playing _the_ game.One of trying to convince voters to vote no by casting doubt in their minds as to what will happen post yes...what currency will you have?How will you pay your mortgage?how will you be paid?YOU'LL HAVE NO MONEY. All that kind of stuff.Absolute nonsense but in line with the nonsense from BT up until now.Project Fear.

you'll note that not one person, from Treasury,Govt,BT have categorically said that there will be no Â£ zone.And the reason?Because there will be a currency zone.
		
Click to expand...

I agree - it makes no sense for rUK to go down any other route - rUK knows it but they just won't say it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			And the fat haggis on the other hand is telling everyone the whole truth and nothing but the truth.  You'll tell me you believed Braveheart next.
		
Click to expand...

Whether he is or not is up to the Scottish voters to decide.  But BT and rUK are not saying anything on a 'sterling zone' other than saying they don't have to have one.  No they don't - but they will.  Salmond cannot speak for rUK on this - only rUK can but they are keeping quiet - because they know it would burst one of BT's mirage balloons (another one being EU membership - which a pragmatic EU would not refuse as the EU always will seek the line of least resistance and that given rise to fewest future problems)


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I agree - it makes no sense for rUK to go down any other route - rUK knows it but they just won't say it.
		
Click to expand...

I've asked before but I'll keep trying...... (need that head against the wall smiley again).

On what basis do you say "it makes no sense for rUK to go down any other route"?!  Pretty sure I'd like my own government and Central Bank to be looking after my own country's interests and giving that 100% rather than considering any other countries issues.  It appears "independent" Scots don't though and that confuses me.

Re the Project Fear, it is up to the Pro Independence campaign to counter that with more solid information on what will happen, not what it wants to happen which is pretty much what they have put out there so far.

Surely it's up to them to discuss/negotiate with the BoE and Westminster on what would be best for them?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			I agree.

My point is, why would you, as an indpendent country, want control over currency, interest rates and economy controlled by somebody else?
		
Click to expand...

But isn't that just the way of the world these days in any case?


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But isn't that just the way of the world these days in any case?
		
Click to expand...

Not sure I follow you.......

Following the latest downturn the US and UK are recovering by using all fo the tools available to them to enable recovery through QE, access to Credit and Interest Rates.

What would an Independent Scotland do if (it may never happen) they find themselves in Ireland's position from about 6 years back?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			And the* fat haggis* on the other hand is telling everyone the whole truth and nothing but the truth.  You'll tell me you *believed Braveheart* next.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I'm not gonna engage with you on this.Get over the stereotypes and be sensible and I'll reply.



NWJocko said:



			I agree.

My point is, why would you, as an indpendent country, want control over currency, interest rates and economy controlled by somebody else?

Not a game of politicking, really just interested in the motivation from pro "independence" to have a relaince on another country from an economical perspective?

Initially at least I can't see any other option.  I wouldn't be comfortable with it if I'd voted Yes though.......
		
Click to expand...

so we're talking about the value of the currency and the interest rate set by the central bank?Say they had to raise interest rates by 1% in 2016 or 2%, for whatever reason.Not ideal for borrowers either side of the wall, but good for savers on both sides.The value of the Â£, so exports and imports.I'm struggling to see a scenario where someone like Carney would make a decision that benefits rUK but disadvantages Scotland?

We're talking partnerships between two countries, so there would have to be agreements on stuff like corp tax too, which maybe wouldn't suit Salmond, but he'll swallow, but it won't result the central bank 'controlling our economy'...we'll collect all our taxes and spend them on things we think are correct, which brings us back to nuclear weapons,HS2,food banks,thames sewage,boris island,wars etc...we'll set the agenda on the social improvement of Scotland, with all the taxes created in Scotland,spent in Scotland.

and again, I'm only seeing this thru the eyes of someone voting yes who wants to keep the Â£...I'd ditch it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			I've asked before but I'll keep trying...... (need that head against the wall smiley again).

On what basis do you say "it makes no sense for rUK to go down any other route"?!  Pretty sure I'd like my own government and Central Bank to be looking after my own country's interests and giving that 100% rather than considering any other countries issues.  It appears "independent" Scots don't though and that confuses me.

Re the Project Fear, it is up to the Pro Independence campaign to counter that with more solid information on what will happen, not what it wants to happen which is pretty much what they have put out there so far.

Surely it's up to them to discuss/negotiate with the BoE and Westminster on what would be best for them?
		
Click to expand...

Because there is too much joint interest between Scotland and rUK - together or separate.

And the YES campaign can't counter the non-position currently held by rUK on a 'sterling zone'.  

Besides - how could the YES campaign counter a position that was _No sterling zone_.  But the rUK could say it won't - but they are not saying that - why not?  Because that would be that - Scotland would just have to do something else.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Not sure I follow you.......

Following the latest downturn the US and UK are recovering by using all fo the tools available to them to enable recovery through QE, access to Credit and Interest Rates.

What would an Independent Scotland do if (it may never happen) they find themselves in Ireland's position from about 6 years back?
		
Click to expand...

They (supported by the rUK) would either not let it happen or they would sort it out.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Sorry, but I'm not gonna engage with you on this.Get over the stereotypes and be sensible and I'll reply.



so we're talking about the value of the currency and the interest rate set by the central bank?Say they had to raise interest rates by 1% in 2016 or 2%, for whatever reason.Not ideal for borrowers either side of the wall, but good for savers on both sides.The value of the Â£, so exports and imports.I'm struggling to see a scenario where someone like Carney would make a decision that benefits rUK but disadvantages Scotland?

We're talking partnerships between two countries, so there would have to be agreements on stuff like corp tax too, which maybe wouldn't suit Salmond, but he'll swallow, but it won't result the central bank 'controlling our economy'...we'll collect all our taxes and spend them on things we think are correct, which brings us back to nuclear weapons,HS2,food banks,thames sewage,boris island,wars etc...we'll set the agenda on the social improvement of Scotland, with all the taxes created in Scotland,spent in Scotland.

and again, I'm only seeing this thru the eyes of someone voting yes who wants to keep the Â£...I'd ditch it.
		
Click to expand...

That's it.  The BoE would work to minimise any negative impact a decision made on either Scotland or rUK.  Some decisions might be more to the benefit of one party than the other - but a decision isn't going to be made to this significant detriment of either party to the agreement.


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Sorry, but I'm not gonna engage with you on this.Get over the stereotypes and be sensible and I'll reply.



so we're talking about the value of the currency and the interest rate set by the central bank?Say they had to raise interest rates by 1% in 2016 or 2%, for whatever reason.Not ideal for borrowers either side of the wall, but good for savers on both sides.The value of the Â£, so exports and imports.I'm struggling to see a scenario *where someone like Carney would make a decision that benefits rUK but disadvantages Scotland?*

We're talking partnerships between two countries, so there would have to be agreements on stuff like corp tax too, which maybe wouldn't suit Salmond, but he'll swallow, but it won't result the central bank 'controlling our economy'...we'll collect all our taxes and spend them on things we think are correct, which brings us back to nuclear weapons,HS2,food banks,thames sewage,boris island,wars etc...we'll set the agenda on the social improvement of Scotland, with all the taxes created in Scotland,spent in Scotland.

and again, I'm only seeing this thru the eyes of someone voting yes who wants to keep the Â£...I'd ditch it.
		
Click to expand...

This sort of emphasises what I'm getting at.

It's not so much whether the BoE Governor would make a decision to disadvantage Scotland, it's more a case of if Scotland (perhaps through misappropriation of their tax income etc) need to use economical levers that they don't have free access to.

The sectoral GDP make up of Scotland and UK minus Scotland is actually pretty different if you look at it therefore it's not inconceivable to be in a position where Scotland needs/wants a particular course of action that it can't carry out.

All hypotheticals, which is why I sort of agree with Old Skier and my previous point that all we've heard up to now is what Salmond wants to happen rather than what he has put in place to happen in the event of a Yes vote which could end up very different.

What would your currency plan be out of interest?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Sorry, but I'm not gonna engage with you on this.Get over the stereotypes and be sensible and I'll reply.



so we're talking about the value of the currency and the interest rate set by the central bank?Say they had to raise interest rates by 1% in 2016 or 2%, for whatever reason.Not ideal for borrowers either side of the wall, but good for savers on both sides.The value of the Â£, so exports and imports.I'm struggling to see a scenario where someone like Carney would make a decision that benefits rUK but disadvantages Scotland?

We're talking partnerships between two countries, so there would have to be agreements on stuff like corp tax too, which maybe wouldn't suit Salmond, but he'll swallow, but it won't result the central bank 'controlling our economy'...we'll collect all our taxes and spend them on things we think are correct, which brings us back to nuclear weapons,HS2,food banks,thames sewage,boris island,wars etc...we'll set the agenda on the social improvement of Scotland, with all the taxes created in Scotland,spent in Scotland.

and again, I'm only seeing this thru the eyes of someone voting yes who wants to keep the Â£...I'd ditch it.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but I thought, from your previous posts, that you were pro-independence and yet you are prepared to immediately cede control of fiscal policy to another nation. 

Not a very grown up sort of independence is it? 

I knew Salmond was a failed economist but I thought that even he would see that any decisions on monetary policy made by BoE would, in the first instance, be for the benefit of UK and Scotland's interests would inevitably  be a secondary consideration. I agree that the interests of the two countries will often overlap but other times they will not.

I repeat, in any currency union, be it sterling or euro, there is inevitably a stronger partner whose interests will dominate.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			This sort of emphasises what I'm getting at.

It's not so much whether the BoE Governor would make a decision to disadvantage Scotland, it's more a case of if Scotland (perhaps through misappropriation of their tax income etc) need to use* economical levers* that they don't have free access to.

The sectoral GDP make up of Scotland and UK minus Scotland is actually pretty different if you look at it therefore it's not inconceivable to be in a position where Scotland needs/wants a particular course of action that it can't carry out.

All hypotheticals, which is why I sort of agree with Old Skier and my previous point that all we've heard up to now is what Salmond wants to happen rather than what he has put in place to happen in the event of a Yes vote which could end up very different.

What would your currency plan be out of interest?

Click to expand...

Like printing more money? I'd be aiming for a pretty benign economy, nothing too racy.I'd also be looking to simplify the tax regime...as someone who owns a business with a 7/8 figure turnover, the meetings I have with accountants make my head spin.

I thought that, proportionally, they're not too far apart?

Obviously, both sides are as bad as each other, in public.Neither will be the first to blink and they'll let Darling/Carmichael and Sturgeon/Canavan and the minions get on with babbling and not conceding ground.The real chat will start after the result is in.

I'd take a punt on floating our own currency, I'd be keen on EFTA,UN and commonwealth membership.Short term pain but the creation of a central bank, economic levers(!) and interest setting abilities sounds good to me...but that won't happen just yet so we'll start with a baby step


----------



## ger147 (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			bookies aren't usually wrong-
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/arti..._100_to_enter_currency_union_50_1_not_to.html

Click to expand...

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/scottish-independence/referendum-outcome


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



Like printing more money? I'd be aiming for a pretty benign economy, nothing too racy.I'd also be looking to simplify the tax regime...as someone who owns a business with a 7/8 figure turnover, the meetings I have with accountants make my head spin.

I thought that, proportionally, they're not too far apart?

Obviously, both sides are as bad as each other, in public.Neither will be the first to blink and they'll let Darling/Carmichael and Sturgeon/Canavan and the minions get on with babbling and not conceding ground.The real chat will start after the result is in.

I'd take a punt on floating our own currency, I'd be keen on EFTA,UN and commonwealth membership.Short term pain but the creation of a central bank, economic levers(!) and interest setting abilities sounds good to me...but that won't happen just yet so we'll start with a baby step 

Click to expand...

Not purely printing more money, changing interest rates, valuing or devaluing the currency, encouraging growth in certain sectors etc.  To be fair, without printing more money the UK and the US would be living in an Ice Age at the moment!!  Congrats on your business, hope it carries on being successful.  Having the ability to shape your own economy 100% as you mention in your last paragraph.  I can't for the life of me understand why pro independence people are happy to be so tied to the Union they want independence from....?

Not too close at all actually, which surprised me when I looked at it as that was my supposition aswell some time back.  Financial Services, Scotland > 15% of GDP, UK minus Scotland <5% (approximately, there are other examples this is one off the top of my head).

It's not about "blinking".  If I was voting I'd want to know why Salmond isn't spending every waking minute thrashing out with the UK government what is the most likely course of action post a Yes vote rather than all this mincing about by both sides. Carneyt himself said yesterday that Scotland (Salmond) need to negotiate with Westminster on currency union, why isn't he (unless he is but given his penchant for publicity I doubt it)?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Sorry but I thought, from your previous posts, that you were pro-independence and yet you are prepared to immediately cede control of fiscal policy to another nation. 

Not a very grown up sort of independence is it? 

I knew Salmond was a failed economist but I thought that even he would see that any decisions on monetary policy made by BoE would, in the first instance, be for the benefit of UK and Scotland's interests would inevitably  be a secondary consideration. I agree that the interests of the two countries will often overlap but other times they will not.

I repeat, in any currency union, be it sterling or euro, there is inevitably a stronger partner whose interests will dominate.
		
Click to expand...

To be clear, I'd ditch the Â£ and float a new currency, take on the liabilities we're responsible for from rUK along with the assets we're due, create a new central bank and go from there.I'd want the new 'Scottish pound' to initially be set at 1=1 with the Â£ and make it interchangeable for ease for joe bloggs.I'd want, initially, for a say, 5 year agreement on things like corp tax etc to be the same.It would be tough for Scotland, but also tough for England too,you'd be wiping away 10% of EVERYTHING but its seems correct to me to do it that way.

But I can appreciate thats not going to happen, so like a sensible person, i'm trying to see an option that might work within the framework we have just now.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Sorry, but I'm not gonna engage with you on this.Get over the stereotypes and be sensible and I'll reply.
		
Click to expand...

Fair do's.  Could you explain why the Yes campaign are so against members of the armed forces Scotish Regiments being excluded from the vote just because they may not reside in Scotland. The vote could/most probably will have implications on their jobs.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Fair do's.  Could you explain why the Yes campaign are so against members of the armed forces Scotish Regiments being excluded from the vote just because they may not reside in Scotland. The vote could/most probably will have implications on their jobs.
		
Click to expand...

Scottish Regiment singular, not plural, but that's a whole new area we might be best avoid.

I have a degree of sympathy with them tbh, but the vote has to be about the folk who live,work and contribute to Scotland, who will be directly and immediately affected by the result.Joining the armed forces means you have to accept you'll be moving does it not?It's part of the package, part of the 'adventure', so with that an acceptance that you'll be on the electoral role elsewhere.

It's the 'west lothian' question in reverse.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Not a very grown up sort of independence is it?
		
Click to expand...

If Scotland in a 'sterling zone' ceding some powers is not quite 'full' independence then so be it - that is what the Scottish voters would be voting for.  

And independence isn't just for Christmas - it's for good.  If 30yrs down the line a 'sterling zone' isn't working too well for Scotland or if the country just decides that it wants to remove any co-dependency with the rUK - then it will no doubt have a referendum with a view to leaving the 'sterling zone'.  Not all questions have to be answered and preferred solitions in place on day 1 - or indeed by yr1, 5 or 10.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Scottish Regiment singular, not plural, but that's a whole new area we might be best avoid.

I have a degree of sympathy with them tbh, but the vote has to be about the folk who live,work and contribute to Scotland, who will be directly and immediately affected by the result.Joining the armed forces means you have to accept you'll be moving does it not?It's part of the package, part of the 'adventure', so with that an acceptance that you'll be on the electoral role elsewhere.

It's the 'west lothian' question in reverse.
		
Click to expand...

And a decision that I too have to live with - as much as I might claim a right to be part of determining the future of my country.  But I live in England - so I don't have that opportunity.  That is notwithstanding the fact that the decision whichever way will have an indirect/secondary effect on me through my own wider family living in Scotland.  

To be told that the impact of the decision on my mother in her mid-80s will not have any impact on *me *is a bit hard to agree with- but there you go.  Nothing I can do about it so no point in moaning about it further - I don't get a vote - end of.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Scottish Regiment singular, not plural.
		
Click to expand...

Wrong but never mind. I suppose we were only of any use during fire fighting, rubbish collection and the odd bit of flood relief. I presume you won't want them back then.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Scottish Regiment singular, not plural, but that's a whole new area we might be best avoid.

I have a degree of sympathy with them tbh, but the vote has to be about the folk who live,work and contribute to Scotland, who will be directly and immediately affected by the result.Joining the armed forces means you have to accept you'll be moving does it not?It's part of the package, part of the 'adventure', so with that an acceptance that you'll be on the electoral role elsewhere.

It's the 'west lothian' question in reverse.
		
Click to expand...

People in the military can be on electoral rolls in their home town - you also have a great deal of people in the military in Scotland that are English.

Can the English living in Scotland vote ?

You mentioned that bookies are rarely wrong ? Have you seen the odds for a No vote ?

You seem to have your heart and head ready for a yes vote - what about if a no vote happens ( currently the bookies see it and polls see it )


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Wrong but never mind. I suppose we were only of any use during fire fighting, rubbish collection and the odd bit of flood relief. I presume you won't want them back then.
		
Click to expand...

In the British Armed forces, there is only one Scottish Regiment now,is that not correct?Apologies if I'm wrong.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			In the British Armed forces, there is only one Scottish Regiment now,is that not correct?Apologies if I'm wrong.
		
Click to expand...


Think there is about 12 Scottish Regiments


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			People in the military can be on electoral rolls in their home town - you also have a great deal of people in the military in Scotland that are English.

Can the English living in Scotland vote ?

You mentioned that bookies are rarely wrong ? Have you seen the odds for a No vote ?

You seem to have your heart and head ready for a yes vote - what about if a no vote happens ( currently the bookies see it and polls see it )
		
Click to expand...

anyone, born in any country can vote if they're on the electoral role in Scotland..English,Polish,american,scouser ;-) anyone.

I have seen the odds on the result, and I've seen them get closer...but the currency zone odds of 1/100 is slightly different.

And I'll be honestly gutted if No wins, really really gutted.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You seem to have your heart and head ready for a yes vote - what about if a no vote happens
		
Click to expand...

That's my main area of concern, nationalists are not known to take defeat very well.

I believe it is ok to vote as long as you are not English but I'm sure some one will come up with the correct answer.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Think there is about 12 Scottish Regiments
		
Click to expand...

12 battalions, but one regiment?


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			In the British Armed forces, there is only one Scottish Regiment now,is that not correct?Apologies if I'm wrong.
		
Click to expand...

You are but it is an easy mistake. I think Liverpoolphil has gone a little ott.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			That's my main area of concern, nationalists are not known to take defeat very well.

I believe it is ok to vote as long as you are not English but I'm sure some one will come up with the correct answer.
		
Click to expand...

you're a very bitter person for some reason.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			12 battalions, but one regiment?
		
Click to expand...

Your forgetting that there are more than just grunt regiments.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			12 battalions, but one regiment?
		
Click to expand...


Nope - about 12 current regiments


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Your forgetting that there are more than just grunt regiments.
		
Click to expand...

so what are the other Scottish ones?


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			you're a very bitter person for some reason.
		
Click to expand...

Not really, just a realist with the experience of life. Just look around you and see what has happened in the past and is happening now where a large minority cannot get what they want.

Tiz the way of the world unfortunately.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			anyone, born in any country can vote if they're on the electoral role in Scotland..English,Polish,american,scouser ;-) anyone.

I have seen the odds on the result, and I've seen them get closer...but the currency zone odds of 1/100 is slightly different.

And I'll be honestly gutted if No wins, really really gutted.
		
Click to expand...

Why gutted ? Are you really that desperate to be away from the UK ? 

Ignore all the political crap but can you not see what a great Island we have working together ?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			so what are the other Scottish ones?
		
Click to expand...

Royal Scots Dragoon Guards
1st Royal Tank Regiment
Scots Guards
Royal Regiment of Scotland
19th Regiment Royal Artillery
40th Regiment Royal Artillery
105th Regiment Royal Artillery 
32 (Scottish) Signal Regiment
The Scottish Transport Regiment
The London Scottish 
The Liverpool Scottish


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			so what are the other Scottish ones?
		
Click to expand...

You have at least 1 cav one for starters. As they are part of your history you can look up to see if there are anymore.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Royal Scots Dragoon Guards
1st Royal Tank Regiment
Scots Guards
Royal Regiment of Scotland
19th Regiment Royal Artillery
40th Regiment Royal Artillery
105th Regiment Royal Artillery 
32 (Scottish) Signal Regiment
The Scottish Transport Regiment
The London Scottish 
The Liverpool Scottish
		
Click to expand...

Your such a spoilsport but 1 RTR is pushing it a bit.  Whilst in the RTR did have to but up with those bloody pipes.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			anyone, born in any country can vote if they're on the electoral role in Scotland..English,Polish,american,scouser ;-) anyone.

I have seen the odds on the result, and I've seen them get closer...but the currency zone odds of 1/100 is slightly different.

And I'll be honestly gutted if No wins, really really gutted.
		
Click to expand...

The odds on currency union appear to be based upon what an independent Scottish Government would seek. Whether the terms offered by the BoE & UK Government would be acceptable to the Scottish people is a separate matter.

However, I think our debate may be irrelevant as a No vote is virtually certain to be the outcome.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why gutted ? Are you really that desperate to be away from the UK ? 

Ignore all the political crap but can you not see what a great Island we have working together ?
		
Click to expand...

I love England, my dad and sister are both English ( both will vote yes) so I've got nothing against England or the English ( your football media excluded)

I want to live in a country that takes responsibilty for itself,represents itself and decides what direction,socially, it takes.Right now that is not possible as the decisions are taken by one of two parties that don't reflect, on the whole,Scotland...New Labour are a shadow of the party I used to support.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I love England, my dad and sister are both English ( both will vote yes) so I've got nothing against England or the English ( your football media excluded)

I want to live in a country that takes responsibilty for itself,represents itself and decides what direction,socially, it takes.Right now that is not possible as the decisions are taken by one of two parties that don't reflect, on the whole,Scotland...New Labour are a shadow of the party I used to support.
		
Click to expand...

They don't represent the whole of England, Wales or Northern Ireland.   You wont get a party in Scotland that represents the whole of the country.    It's what they call the democratic system of government.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I love England, my dad and sister are both English ( both will vote yes) so I've got nothing against England or the English ( your football media excluded)

I want to live in a country that takes responsibilty for itself,represents itself and decides what direction,socially, it takes.Right now that is not possible as the decisions are taken by one of two parties that don't reflect, on the whole,Scotland...New Labour are a shadow of the party I used to support.
		
Click to expand...

So it's all political reasons ?

Any political party will always look after one thing - themselves 

Do you think there is a risk is going Independant 

And do you really see a Yes vote happening ?


----------



## 19thagain (Jan 31, 2014)

Re the currency debate ..., am I correct in thinking that New Zealand and Australia both used the pound, backed by the BOE when breaking away and only later circa 1969 created their own individual dollar.

Can Scotland do this ... Of course!

Do we need The English to show us how to count two and two ... I don't think so.

Do we need the English to hold our hand whilst creating our own future ... I don't think so.

If it requires BT voters to resort to name calling of our First Minister, thereby inferring that all Scots who placed him there are of an inferior mentality, then we are better away from this type of person.   I would however like to compare the name callers IQ and qualifications with that of Mr Salmon - I would suspect the same comparison as their handicap at golf compares to Rory.


----------



## stevie_r (Jan 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Royal Scots Dragoon Guards
1st Royal Tank Regiment - *Will merge with 2 RTR in 2014 to form 'The Royal Tank Regiment' and not regionally recruited*
Scots Guards - *Only about 60 % Scottish*
Royal Regiment of Scotland
19th Regiment Royal Artillery
40th Regiment Royal Artillery - *No longer with us*
105th Regiment Royal Artillery - *TA*
32 (Scottish) Signal Regiment - *TA*
The Scottish Transport Regiment - *TA*
The London Scottish - *A company of the London Regiment - TA, not recruited in Scotland*
The Liverpool Scottish - *A platoon of a TA unit, not recruited in Scotland*

Click to expand...

In the interests of accuracy


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So it's all political reasons ?

Any political party will always look after one thing - themselves 

Do you think there is a risk is going Independant 

And do you really see a Yes vote happening ?
		
Click to expand...

Many different reasons...did you know the life expectancy in certain parts of Glasgow is lower than the life expectancy in certain parts of The Lebanon?The number of food banks is shameful, but even having to have food banks in The UK is mind bending to me.All the while we plan to build super fast trains and redundant nuclear submarines and Â£20Billion airports.Now I know alot of that will sit uneasy with residents of England too, but we have the opportunity to remove ourselves from the Westminster gravy train that endorses all of that.

Now I know that Holyrood could do more right now, but all the political parties here hid behind the lack of funding.I want that excuse removed.

When I hear Boris demanding more funds at the expense of Strathclyde because a Â£ spent in London is worth more than in Scotland, I understand why he's saying that, but I'm sick of having to live with the pre-conceived idea we're a  weight around the neck of England when we're clearly not.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Many different reasons...did you know the life expectancy in certain parts of Glasgow is lower than the life expectancy in certain parts of The Lebanon?The number of food banks is shameful, but even having to have food banks in The UK is mind bending to me.All the while we plan to build super fast trains and redundant nuclear submarines and Â£20Billion airports.Now I know alot of that will sit uneasy with residents of England too, but we have the opportunity to remove ourselves from the Westminster gravy train that endorses all of that.

Now I know that Holyrood could do more right now, but all the political parties here hid behind the lack of funding.I want that excuse removed.

When I hear Boris demanding more funds at the expense of Strathclyde because a Â£ spent in London is worth more than in Scotland, I understand why he's saying that, but I'm sick of having to live with the pre-conceived idea we're a  weight around the neck of England when we're clearly not.
		
Click to expand...

Most of what you say I can understand and agree with, however the only way to defeat the present bunch of politicians is strength in numbers. Splitting up the UK is only playing into the political class's hands, why do you think they devolved everything. So they could blame others and double their numbers.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 31, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			In the interests of accuracy
		
Click to expand...

Recruiting areas for the RAC has yet to be finalised however as the RTR's strongest recruiting area is SW and SE I don't see us nicking anyone from uuupp north.  Unfortunately the pipes are staying. :lol:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			anyone, born in any country can vote if they're on the electoral role in Scotland..English,Polish,american,scouser ;-) anyone.
		
Click to expand...

And that is what fills me with deep, deep joy - the motley crew who can decide the forever future of my country on the grounds that they live in Scotland at the moment and might be 'economically' impacted by the decision - even although many might disappear off from the shores of Scotland for whatever reason in the days, weeks, months and few years following the vote - so not impacted at all really.   Excellent.  But there you go.  I have to accept that that is what has been decided.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And that is what fills me with deep, deep joy - the motley crew who can decide the forever future of my country on the grounds that they live in Scotland at the moment and might be 'economically' impacted by the decision - even although many might disappear off from the shores of Scotland for whatever reason in the days, weeks, months and few years following the vote - so not impacted at all really.   Excellent.  But there you go.  I have to accept that that is what has been decided.
		
Click to expand...

As we do, although I don't agree with it do pray tell why it should be any different for Scotland.


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And that is what fills me with deep, deep joy - the motley crew who can decide the forever future of my country on the grounds that they live in Scotland at the moment and might be 'economically' impacted by the decision - even although many might disappear off from the shores of Scotland for whatever reason in the days, weeks, months and few years following the vote - so not impacted at all really.   Excellent.  But there you go.  I have to accept that that is what has been decided.
		
Click to expand...

Do you whine on and on about this at every UK general election where anyone in the "motley crew" on the UK electoral roll can vote on the future of your country?!

Painful.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Most of what you say I can understand and agree with, however the only way to defeat the present bunch of politicians is strength in numbers. Splitting up the UK is only playing into the political class's hands, why do you think they devolved everything. So they could blame others and double their numbers.
		
Click to expand...

There is no defeating the present UK duopoly of New Labour/Conservative, two sides of the same coin.They're effectively the same party now, like The Republican/Democrat parties in America.Lib Dem have destroyed themselves and are being replaced by UKIP as the king makers in any close race.Scottish politics are centre left, always have been always will be...English politics have moved to centre right, so there is a direct and fundamental difference between the two countries at the ballot box.

This is an opportunity for Scottish Labour to retake the centre left from The SNP, who are a wee bit further to the right imo.A Scottish Socialist party,Green Party,Scottish Conservative party, along with Proportional Representation will reflect Scottish society far better than anything Westminster could offer.And while that may sound selfish given your strength in numbers ( and it is selfish) suggestion, this is an opportunity to re-shape Scotland into a country with problems, but ones we can address according to our needs, not those imposed on us by Westminster.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And that is what fills me with deep, deep joy - the motley crew who can decide the forever future of my country on the grounds that they live in Scotland at the moment and might be 'economically' impacted by the decision - even although many might disappear off from the shores of Scotland for whatever reason in the days, weeks, months and few years following the vote - so not impacted at all really.   Excellent.  But there you go.  I have to accept that that is what has been decided.
		
Click to expand...

would you prefer it if only those born in Scotland get a vote?What about the Indian guy with the phone shop on Great Junction Street who's lived here for over 30 years and invested his life,time and money into Scotland?Or the Polish guy who came 3 years ago and now has a couple of hair salons?What about the american moved here by IBM 8 years ago who married a Scottish lassie he married?

Or the Scottish guy who moved for a job in England 15 years ago and stayed, the Scottish lad who went to Oz on the Â£10 ticket in the 60's or the woman who met a Canadian guy in the 80's and moved to Toronto?

The folk who have made a concious decision to invest emotionally and financially in Scotland should have a say.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 31, 2014)

As the EU are making the majority of current legislation you are about to jump out of the frying pan into the fire IMHO. Or, perhaps you might not join as it's not clear what yer man wants yet.


----------



## ger147 (Jan 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			would you prefer it if only those born in Scotland get a vote?What about the Indian guy with the phone shop on Great Junction Street who's lived here for over 30 years and invested his life,time and money into Scotland?Or the Polish guy who came 3 years ago and now has a couple of hair salons?What about the american moved here by IBM 8 years ago who married a Scottish lassie he married?

Or the Scottish guy who moved for a job in England 15 years ago and stayed, the Scottish lad who went to Oz on the Â£10 ticket in the 60's or the woman who met a Canadian guy in the 80's and moved to Toronto?

The folk who have made a concious decision to invest emotionally and financially in Scotland should have a say.
		
Click to expand...

Please, not this again!! SILH will never accept it so please don't try and prove it to him


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			would you prefer it if only those born in Scotland get a vote?What about the Indian guy with the phone shop on Great Junction Street who's lived here for over 30 years and invested his life,time and money into Scotland?Or the Polish guy who came 3 years ago and now has a couple of hair salons?What about the american moved here by IBM 8 years ago who married a Scottish lassie he married?

Or the Scottish guy who moved for a job in England 15 years ago and stayed, the Scottish lad who went to Oz on the Â£10 ticket in the 60's or the woman who met a Canadian guy in the 80's and moved to Toronto?

The folk who have made a concious decision to invest emotionally and financially in Scotland should have a say.
		
Click to expand...

SiLH.  Please read and digest this and never mention the fact you can't vote in a country you're not on the elctoral roll in as "wrong" ever again.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The folk who have made a concious decision to invest emotionally and financially in Scotland should have a say.
		
Click to expand...

Which by default includes the Rest of the UK.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Do you whine on and on about this at every UK general election where anyone in the "motley crew" on the UK electoral roll can vote on the future of your country?!

Painful.
		
Click to expand...

No - because I can look to vote out my MP if I don't like him, and if I want a say in the day to day running of affairs in Scotland I can move back to Scotland and vote in the Holyrood elections (at at least one more Westminster election).  Results of General elections are temporary arrangements - the result of the this referendum is permanent - and should be more than just whether Jo Bloggs feels a little bit better or worse off following the decision.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 31, 2014)

This is better than watching the cricket.


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No - because I can look to vote out my MP if I don't like him, and* if I want a say in the day to day running of affairs in Scotland I can move back to Scotland and vote in the Holyrood elections *(at at least one more Westminster election).  Results of General elections are temporary arrangements - the result of the this referendum is permanent - and should be more than just whether Jo Bloggs feels a little bit better or worse off following the decision.
		
Click to expand...

The bit in bold.

Say no more.

You're arrogant and patronising view of the "motley crew" who are resident in "your country" while you choose to live elsewhere is almost laughable.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Which by default includes the Rest of the UK.
		
Click to expand...

To a degree there is a grain of truth in this, but if so, why doesn't Cameron want to debate Salmond?And if everyone in The UK got a vote, Scotland would be removed from the union tomorrow, wouldn't you agree?


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			To a degree there is a grain of truth in this, but if so, why doesn't Cameron want to debate Salmond?And if everyone in The UK got a vote, Scotland would be removed from the union tomorrow, wouldn't you agree?
		
Click to expand...

Cameron debating with Salmond would be a major political mistake. As you point out, the majority of you are left of centre and would vote Yes to spite yourself if a Tory Leader told them in a debate to vote No.  Same principle as supporting the other side whenever England play in any sport.

Yep, Salmond would have secured your Yes vote by giving the vote to all UK but that is because of the attitude of the noisey minority of Scots that make it very clear that they hate everyone south of the wall.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Cameron debating with Salmond would be a major political mistake. As you point out, the majority of you are left of centre and would vote Yes to spite yourself if a Tory Leader told them in a debate to vote No.  Same principle as supporting the other side whenever England play in any sport.

Yep, Salmond would have secured your Yes vote by giving the vote to all UK but that is because of the attitude of the noisey minority of Scots that make it very clear that they hate everyone south of the wall.
		
Click to expand...

Yup, so taking everything into consideration, it has to be only a vote for those who live here.There are bigots and dafties on both sides, cybernats and projectfear merchants, I'm hoping they're drowned out by the sensible ( and pro indy  ) majority...I'm expecting the biggest ever turnout in September.


----------



## stevie_r (Jan 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Recruiting areas for the RAC has yet to be finalised however as the RTR's strongest recruiting area is SW and SE I don't see us nicking anyone from uuupp north.  Unfortunately the pipes are staying. :lol:
		
Click to expand...

2RTR was always the cockney chav cav


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Please, not this again!! SILH will never accept it so please don't try and prove it to him 

Click to expand...

I've already said that I accept that the decision is made and that is that.  Doesn't mean to say that I can't disagree with it.  A way could have been found to take into account the views of the Scottish diaspora - however that would have been defined - it could have been done.  

I might be more inclined to make *additional *emotional and financial investment in Scotland (I already do that even although I don't live there) by moving to Scotland following a YES vote.  In the event of a NO vote I may be less inclined - but I'd still like,k to do that.  And in saying that I am not suggesting I favour the YES camp or the NO camp - a move home following a YES would be on basis of wishing to contribute to making an independent Scotland work and a success.  

But at least I won't be disappearing from Scotland in the weeks or months following a vote as many who can vote will do.

Anyway - makes no difference - I don't get a vote and that I accept.  I will simply discussion YES/NO with those who do and maybe influence them one way or the other.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			The bit in bold.

Say no more.

You're arrogant and patronising view of the "motley crew" who are resident in "your country" while you choose to live elsewhere is almost laughable.
		
Click to expand...

It was a throw away generalism that I regret using as I didn't mean it in reference to the voting constituency as a whole.  But the bottom line is that I do not think it correct that the decision is in the hands of those who just so happen to be living in Scotland at the moment.  That some of the voting constituency are a motley bunch - well - you might disagree - but many will certainly be itinerant.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			To a degree there is a grain of truth in this, but if so, why doesn't Cameron want to debate Salmond?And if everyone in The UK got a vote, Scotland would be removed from the union tomorrow, wouldn't you agree?
		
Click to expand...


I would disagree that Scotland would be removed from the Union

I think most would realise the value of a joint union - yes there would be the odd "anti scottish" just as there would be the odd "anti English" votes but think you would be pleasantly surprised 

I agree with the spending imbalance - but it's the same for most of England - Cameron and his cronies are looking after themselves and the south - the rich are getting richer , they are trying to get London even richer

I agree the HS2 is a waste of money and still hold out hope that it will be shelved.

The Trident - well currently it's an unfortunately needed in the current world and an independent a Scotland wouldn't stop that because whilst it costs to built it's also bringing jobs to the Clyde area. There are lots of areas of spending that need culling to improve lots of other areas. Massive amounts of cuts are being made currently and it's all countries being effected.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			To a degree there is a grain of truth in this, but if so, why doesn't Cameron want to debate Salmond?And if everyone in The UK got a vote, Scotland would be removed from the union tomorrow, wouldn't you agree?
		
Click to expand...

A lot of folk in the rUK are starting to express an opinion on the referendum and it's impact on the union and the rUK - would they therefore not expect their views to be reflected in statements from their MPs or PM?  

We in rUK may not get a vote and our individual voice cannot be heard in Scotland.  But that is why we have MPs - to listen to, reflect upon and represent the views of their constituents - and if not MP to Scotland then MP to PM and PM to Scotland. Silence is telling.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			A lot of folk in the rUK are starting to express an opinion on the referendum and it's impact on the union and the rUK - would they therefore not expect their views to be reflected in statements from their MPs or PM?  

We in rUK may not get a vote and our individual voice cannot be heard in Scotland.  But that is why we have MPs - to listen to, reflect upon and represent the views of their constituents - and if not MP to Scotland then MP to PM and PM to Scotland. Silence is telling.
		
Click to expand...

There is currently no such place as rUK - it's called England or Wales.


----------



## ger147 (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But at least I won't be disappearing from Scotland in the weeks or months following a vote...
		
Click to expand...

You did that decades ago.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But at least I won't be disappearing from Scotland in the weeks or months following a vote as many who can vote will do.
		
Click to expand...

Hate to be pedantic, but you can't "disappear from Scotland" if you don't live there


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It was a throw away generalism that I regret using as I didn't mean it in reference to the voting constituency as a whole.  But the bottom line is that I do not think it correct that the decision is in the hands of those who just so happen to be living in Scotland at the moment.  That some of the voting constituency are a motley bunch - well - you might disagree - but many will certainly be itinerant.
		
Click to expand...

You seem to have an inbuilt belief that you are better placed to make a decision on the future of a country you have chosen to leave and not reside in than those who live and contribute to society there every day which is a frighteningly arrogant point of view.

I am a very proud Scot living in England and I have no place voting in the referendum.  Will I ever live in Scotland again, maybe, but not certain therefore why should I have a say on it's future and a "Joe Bloggs, Motley Crew, Itinerant" (feel free to use another condescending label) who lives/works/owns a business there shouldn't?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 31, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			You seem to have an inbuilt belief that you are better placed to make a decision on the future of a country you have chosen to leave and not reside in than those who live and contribute to society there every day which is a frighteningly arrogant point of view.

I am a very proud Scot living in England and I have no place voting in the referendum.  Will I ever live in Scotland again, maybe, but not certain therefore why should I have a say on it's future and a "Joe Bloggs, Motley Crew, Itinerant" (feel free to use another condescending label) who lives/works/owns a business there shouldn't?
		
Click to expand...

If you could vote - would you like to see a Scotland being Independant ?


----------



## ger147 (Jan 31, 2014)

As for Acceptance...

Acceptance in human psychology is a person's assent to the reality of a situation, recognizing a process or condition (often a negative or uncomfortable situation) without attempting to change it, *protest*, or exit.


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			If you could vote - would you like to see a Scotland being Independant ?
		
Click to expand...

I probably am not as well informed as I should (or would) be were I voting so a little difficult to answer.

Based on what I know, I would vote No.  However, in my younger days when I was more nationalistic than realistic I would have voted Yes in a heartbeat.  Salmond has been very clever getting the voting age reduced to 16 for this referendum.  Somebody else posted something similar earlier in the thread and I'm the same.  That goes for 99.9% of my friends I've discussed the issue with (some still in Scotland, some not).

My concern is, as I've stated previously, all we hear from Salmond is what he wants to happen post a Yes vote rather than what he has discussed in detail with Westminster and agreed, in principle, what will happen.  

Salmond is probably the best politician by a distance (which probably isn't a recommendation) operating today in the UK which is why Cameron et al are wary of giving him an opportunity for easy posturing.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Hate to be pedantic, but you can't "disappear from Scotland" if you don't live there 

Click to expand...

Precisely why I can be 100% confident that I won't be disappearing


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			You seem to have an inbuilt belief that you are better placed to make a decision on the future of a country you have chosen to leave and not reside in than those who live and contribute to society there every day which is a frighteningly arrogant point of view.

I am a very proud Scot living in England and I have no place voting in the referendum.  Will I ever live in Scotland again, maybe, but not certain therefore why should I have a say on it's future and a "Joe Bloggs, Motley Crew, Itinerant" (feel free to use another condescending label) who lives/works/owns a business there shouldn't?
		
Click to expand...

An itenerant worker is one who moves about for work - tell me what about that does not apply to many folk currently living in Scotland.

And I DO NOT feel I am better placed to make a decision - I just would have liked to have been consulted if not involved in some way.  Those who live in Scotland at the moment clearly have a more immediate cause for concern or hope than I do given they will be living there following the referendum - and I will not be.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

And I do not protest - protest is futile. The decision is made - I accept it - I have simply re-stated my view.


----------



## ger147 (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And I do not protest - protest is futile. The decision is made - I accept it - I have simply re-stated my view.
		
Click to expand...

Oh I think you do.


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			An itenerant worker is one who moves about for work - tell me what about that does not apply to many folk currently living in Scotland.

And I DO NOT feel I am better placed to make a decision - I just would have liked to have been consulted if not involved in some way.  Those who live in Scotland at the moment clearly have a more immediate cause for concern or hope than I do given they will be living there following the referendum - and I will not be.
		
Click to expand...

So, as you and I are itinerant workers in England should we not be allowed to vote if there was similar referendum affecting England?  Or would you then argue about how unfair that would be?

Consulted!!  Ha Ha!! :rofl:  Who do you think you are!!?  I fear I may have underestimated your sense of self importance previously!!!


----------



## PieMan (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And I DO NOT feel I am better placed to make a decision - I just would have liked to have been consulted if not involved in some way.  Those who live in Scotland at the moment clearly have a more immediate cause for concern or hope than I do given they will be living there following the referendum - and I will not be.
		
Click to expand...

Reminds me of the classic Billy Connolly quote about Sean Connery when he was inducting him into the BAFTA Fellowship:

"He towers over Scotland like a collosus....................from the Bahamas"!!

I personally think Scottish Independence is an excellent debate and I can certainly appreciate and respect your views SILH. But I can also see where others are coming from here. At the end of the day the voting rules have been set and all anyone outside Scotland can do is watch what happens.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Consulted!!  Ha Ha!! :rofl:  Who do you think you are!!?  I fear I may have underestimated your sense of self importance previously!!!
		
Click to expand...

I think I am someone who cares about Scotland and it's future.  Doesn't sound like you do and don't actually care - well that's your prerogative.  But don't go laughing at folk who do care.  I say I care - that should be good enough for you.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

PieMan said:



			At the end of the day the voting rules have been set and all anyone outside Scotland can do is watch what happens.
		
Click to expand...

I KNOW - is nobody actually read that I accept them and that I am simply re-stating my view.  But it's a done deal.  And that's it.  I'm not going to change my view just because it's decided - even though some find it a laughing matter.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I think I am someone who cares about Scotland and it's future.  Doesn't sound like you do and don't actually care - well that's your prerogative.  But don't go laughing at folk who do care.  I say I care - that should be good enough for you.
		
Click to expand...

You care that much you don't live there ?


----------



## ger147 (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I KNOW - is nobody actually read that I accept them and that I am simply re-stating my view.  But it's a done deal.  And that's it.  I'm not going to change my view just because it's decided - even though some find it a laughing matter.
		
Click to expand...

A protest (also called a remonstrance or a remonstration) is* an expression of objection by words* or by actions to particular events, policies, or situations. Protests can take many different forms; from individual statements to mass demonstrations.


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I think I am someone who cares about Scotland and it's future.  Doesn't sound like you do and don't actually care - well that's your prerogative.  But don't go laughing at folk who do care.  I say I care - that should be good enough for you.
		
Click to expand...

You have absolutely no idea do you?

I care very deeply about Scotland and it's future and would urge every Scotsman/woman to do likewise.

I do not expect to be personally consulted on the future of the country I have chosen to leave though, which you seem to think you have a right to?  

I am laughing at your arrogance, not at people who care about Scotland who I will :clap: all day long.

So, please, do not try to fit me into into one of your condescending sterotypes.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You care that much you don't live there ?



Click to expand...

So what do you want me to do - take my kids out of school and college - change my job and my wife's job? Oh yes - that'll work!   

I'm just delighted to hear that everyone who lives in Scotland cares about this and is completely engaged with the debate and that there with be a 100% turnout.  Of course they all do - of course there will be - really?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jan 31, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			You have absolutely no idea do you?

I care very deeply about Scotland and it's future and would urge every Scotsman/woman to do likewise.

I do not expect to be personally consulted on the future of the country I have chosen to leave though, which you seem to think you have a right to?  

I am laughing at your arrogance, not at people who care about Scotland who I will :clap: all day long.

So, please, do not try to fit me into into one of your condescending sterotypes.
		
Click to expand...

Like you are not one...

Enough - can't be bothered.


----------



## NWJocko (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Like you are not one...
		
Click to expand...

Excuse me?

One what?


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 31, 2014)

You Yes voters do realise that if you ever get independence the FL will never let Celtic or Rangers play in the Championship. :rofl:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 31, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So what do you want me to do - take my kids out of school and college - change my job and my wife's job? Oh yes - that'll work!   

I'm just delighted to hear that everyone who lives in Scotland cares about this and is completely engaged with the debate and that there with be a 100% turnout.  Of course they all do - of course there will be - really?
		
Click to expand...

Well yes - if really do care so much about your country like you state - why are you not back there to ensure you get your voice ?


----------



## In_The_Rough (Jan 31, 2014)

Is Sean Connery going to vote as he is a staunch SNP supporter? Perhaps he can email it in from his Bahamas villa


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jan 31, 2014)

In_The_Rough said:



			Is Sean Connery going to vote as he is a staunch SNP supporter? Perhaps he can email it in from his Bahamas villa

Click to expand...

The wife beater has been very quiet,eh?I reckon he's been telt, keep schtum ya tax avoiding auld goat.

Speaking of celebs, its interesting that Billy Connolly has ruled out taking sides...once a labour supporting unionist, now having second thoughts?


----------



## DCB (Jan 31, 2014)

I wouldn't worry about it, whatever the outcome there'll be nothing left to govern and take forward. The current leadership of all the parties in Scotland seem to spend all their time preparing for the vote in 8 months time. Who is actually actively governing the country at the moment and who is looking out for for us NOW rather than focussing on something that will take place in the future.

Aye, if this keeps up we're off to hell in a handcart


----------



## In_The_Rough (Jan 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The wife beater has been very quiet,eh?I reckon he's been telt, keep schtum ya tax avoiding auld goat.

Speaking of celebs, its interesting that Billy Connolly has ruled out taking sides...once a labour supporting unionist, now having second thoughts?
		
Click to expand...

Indeed, only said it for a bit of banter but you correct in what you are saying. I like Billy though I think he is a decent man and have a lot of time for him. Anyway on a more serious note I do not people who have gone abroad to live in particular wealthy people who have done it for tax reasons and nothing else should be having their say on political matters on a country which they choose not to live in. If I went to live in the USA I would not be protesting and commenting on UK matters *Morrissey are you reading this*


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 31, 2014)

In_The_Rough said:



			Indeed, only said it for a bit of banter but you correct in what you are saying. I like Billy though I think he is a decent man and have a lot of time for him. Anyway on a more serious note I do not people who have gone abroad to live in particular wealthy people who have done it for tax reasons and nothing else should be having their say on political matters on a country which they choose not to live in. If I went to live in the USA I would not be protesting and commenting on UK matters *Morrissey are you reading this*

Click to expand...

Bono appears to be one of the worst at doing that 

Constantly bleating about the need for more funds and aid for the less well off and having his say on the poor finances in his country - whilst he sits on his tax free multi billions contributing nothing


----------



## In_The_Rough (Jan 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Bono appears to be one of the worst at doing that 

Constantly bleating about the need for more funds and aid for the less well off and having his say on the poor finances in his country - whilst he sits on his tax free multi billions contributing nothing
		
Click to expand...

Does he not live in Ireland though I am not sure? Know what you are saying with the Tax dodging though and the constant aid appeals!!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 31, 2014)

In_The_Rough said:



			Does he not live in Ireland though I am not sure? Know what you are saying with the Tax dodging though and the constant aid appeals!!
		
Click to expand...


Only for a couple months of the year ( save pay taxes ) - has places in the States , Caribbean and Monaco


----------



## In_The_Rough (Jan 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Only for a couple months of the year ( save pay taxes ) - has places in the States , Caribbean and Monaco
		
Click to expand...

Real jet setter then isn't he, and as usual Monaco makes it's appearance. Still at least he spends a bit of time in the country. Morrissey only comes over here if he is doing a tour and yet is one of the most vocal of all ex pats, hate the bloke but he does make some great tunes and The Smiths were superb. Monaco it is about time they clamped down on that place, it is in Europe is it not. Makes a joke of everything really.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 31, 2014)

In_The_Rough said:



			Real jet setter then isn't he, and as usual Monaco makes it's appearance. Still at least he spends a bit of time in the country. Morrissey only comes over here if he is doing a tour and yet is one of the most vocal of all ex pats, hate the bloke but he does make some great tunes and The Smiths were superb. Monaco it is about time they clamped down on that place, it is in Europe is it not. Makes a joke of everything really.
		
Click to expand...


Isle of Man is another tax haven ( just less glamour )

The country forces these people away and stops the top sports men/ladies from playing here - tax laws

Same with big sporting events - the sportsmen just don't want to give away over 50% of their winnings to our government


----------



## In_The_Rough (Jan 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Isle of Man is another tax haven ( just less glamour )

The country forces these people away and stops the top sports men/ladies from playing here - tax laws

Same with big sporting events - the sportsmen just don't want to give away over 50% of their winnings to our government
		
Click to expand...

Yes the Manx does not quite have the glamour of Monaco does it. Know what you are saying about the 50% rate but people on far less money than those have to pay it so don't fully buy into that, that is why they do it yes but I do think it is a bit of bad form on their part


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 31, 2014)

In_The_Rough said:



			Yes the Manx does not quite have the glamour of Monaco does it. Know what you are saying about the 50% rate but people on far less money than those have to pay it so don't fully buy into that, that is why they do it yes but I do think it is a bit of bad form on their part
		
Click to expand...

We are over taxed here as it is - our country must be rolling in it with the amount we have to pay to our government


----------



## In_The_Rough (Jan 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			We are over taxed here as it is - our country must be *rolling in it *with the amount we have to pay to our government
		
Click to expand...

You kidding? we are a few trillion in debt are we not add to the fact we near a few billion loose change hanging about in case we decide to have a war with someone else


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 31, 2014)

In_The_Rough said:



			You kidding? we are a few trillion in debt are we not add to the fact we near a few billion loose change hanging about in case we decide to have a war with someone else
		
Click to expand...


Yeah I know mate - was sort of taking the micheal about the state of our countries finances 

It isn't down to us that we are in trouble ( well not as bad as we were )


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

So the Chancellor has stated that if Scotland vote for Independance then they walk away from the pound 

So Eurozone it is then - good luck with that :thup:


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So the Chancellor has stated that if Scotland vote for Independance then they walk away from the pound 

So Eurozone it is then - good luck with that :thup:
		
Click to expand...

We have a political miracle.  All 3 major parties are towing the same line.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			We have a political miracle.  All 3 major parties are towing the same line.
		
Click to expand...

You mean they are trying to pull a fast one?

Though actually @liverpoolphil 




			So the Chancellor has stated that if Scotland vote for Independance then they walk away from the pound
		
Click to expand...

 I don't think he's saying that is he - he seems more to be saying that rUK wouldn't admit Scotland to a 'Sterling-zone'

Interesting listening to Osborne at the moment as he has leapt into the referendum debate with both wellies as he is telling the YES campaign that they have got their finances and economics all wrong.

I don't think though there is any relevance going back to the banking crisis and considering an iScotland's ability to bail out their banks in the way the UK has had to.  Well there *wasn't* a banking crisis on an iScotland government watch - it didn't happen - and the chances of their being a further one of any like the same nature are very slim - iScotland or not.

Of course their 'we will not agree to a sterling-zone' statement today does not actually tell us what might be his response were the First Minister of an iScotland to come knocking on his door asking to join one.  He might not like it but...

Besides - telling Scotland that an rUK will let an iScotland sink - if that is what would happen as Osborne seems to think would happen - then that is a little dodgy as it displays a Westminster attitude to Scotland that is grist to the mill for the YES campaign.

Anyway - let's see how this goes down in Scotland - interesting - veeeery interesting.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You mean they are trying to pull a fast one?

Though actually @liverpoolphil  I don't think he's saying that is he - he seems more to be saying that rUK wouldn't admit Scotland to a 'Sterling-zone'

Interesting listening to Osborne at the moment as he has leapt into the referendum debate with both wellies as he is telling the YES campaign that they have got their finances and economics all wrong.

I don't think though there is any relevance going back to the banking crisis and considering an iScotland's ability to bail out their banks in the way the UK has had to.  *Well there wasn't a banking crisis on an iScotland government watch - it didn't happen - and the chances of their being a further one of any like the same nature are very slim - iScotland or not.*Of course their 'we will not agree to a sterling-zone' statement today does not actually tell us what might be his response were the First Minister of an iScotland to come knocking on his door asking to join one.  He might not like it but...

Besides - telling Scotland that an rUK will let an iScotland sink - if that is what would happen as Osborne seems to think would happen - then that is a little dodgy as it displays a Westminster attitude to Scotland that is grist to the mill for the YES campaign.

Anyway - let's see how this goes down in Scotland - interesting - veeeery interesting.
		
Click to expand...

At best that is naive.

If not naive then dumb.

Why isn't Salmond knocking on his door?  I've said before that, were I voting (either way) I'd want him to practically live in Westminster and Downing St to actually come up with answers to the questions that are being asked.  Why do you think he isn't?  Is it because the answers/reality aren't in line with his "what I want to happen" white paper?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

How do you get by each day living and working in a country you clearly want no part off 

It always amuses me the anti English fraction from Scotland who actually abide in England 

Basically anti English in just words


If they are so proud of Scotland then we will all look forward to them moving back to Scotland in the near future because it appears that live is going to be perfect for them after the vote


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So the Chancellor has stated that if Scotland vote for Independance then they walk away from the pound 

So Eurozone it is then - good luck with that :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Who is to say they will be allowed to join the EU and Euro?   It's not a taken position.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 13, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			At best that is naive.

If not naive then dumb.

Why isn't Salmond knocking on his door?  I've said before that, were I voting (either way) I'd want him to practically live in Westminster and Downing St to actually come up with answers to the questions that are being asked.  Why do you think he isn't?  *Is it because the answers/reality aren't in line with his "what I want to happen" white paper?*

Click to expand...

You hit the nail on the head. The most annoying thing for me about the "debate" is that the nats aren't telling us what we're actually voting for. Now, there are clearly issues for them in terms of bottoming it all out, but they don't even appear to be trying to sort out some of the most fundamental issues such as currency.

At least Gideon is giving a straight answer to that question.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 13, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			You hit the nail on the head. The most annoying thing for me about the "debate" is that the nats aren't telling us what we're actually voting for. Now, there are clearly issues for them in terms of bottoming it all out, but they don't even appear to be trying to sort out some of the most fundamental issues such as currency.

At least Gideon is giving a straight answer to that question.
		
Click to expand...

It makes me chuckle really.  Pro Independence (and SILH on here) bang on tirelessly that Westminster should come up with all the answers!??  

Is it not Scotland (Salmond) that wants the opportunity to shape their own country.  If so they should be working tirelessly to get as close as possible to agreement (as you say unlikely to get to the bottom of everything but a damn sight closer than they are at the minute).

I actually see the onus on the SNP/Salmond to put a clear picture to the electorate what sort of country they will be voting for in reality (rather than his pipe dream white paper).....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			It makes me chuckle really.  Pro Independence (and SILH on here) bang on tirelessly that Westminster should come up with all the answers!??  

Is it not Scotland (Salmond) that wants the opportunity to shape their own country.  If so they should be working tirelessly to get as close as possible to agreement (as you say unlikely to get to the bottom of everything but a damn sight closer than they are at the minute).

I actually see the onus on the SNP/Salmond to put a clear picture to the electorate what sort of country they will be voting for in reality (rather than his pipe dream white paper).....
		
Click to expand...

I'm glad Osborne has come in and said this - it makes his view clear and that is good.  All I am saying is that I'm not sure it'll help the BT campaign as much as he thinks it will.  And I'm not at all anti-England and I enjoy living down here.

If the YES campaign are happy for an iScotland to be tied to the rUK through a 'sterling-zone' - at least in the short-medium term - then that is their business - and if the voters decide that's not the sort of independence they will be happy with then they will be more likely to vote NO.  And similarly if they believe Osborne today then they'll also then be more likely to vote NO.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			You hit the nail on the head. The most annoying thing for me about the "debate" is that the nats aren't telling us what we're actually voting for. Now, there are clearly issues for them in terms of bottoming it all out, but they don't even appear to be trying to sort out some of the most fundamental issues such as currency.

At least Gideon is giving a straight answer to that question.
		
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree and it is good that Osborne and the other party leaders have made their standpoint clear - it needed said as now the YES have to make their position clear - at least there is now something to be debated.  It's then up to the voters to decide whether they believe that what Osborne and co. say would be the actual outcome in the event...

And in truth whilst there are issues that the YES campaign are less than clear about I am not sure that from a NO perspective I have heard what BT is offering either.  Are they offering the status quo or not?  I don't know.  If they are, then can Osborne and Cameron just come out and say as they have on the 'sterling-zone' that nothing will change short-medium term in all current arrangements Westminster has with Scotland.

And at least that will inform a proper debate also.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Why has SLH  not moved north. He has such love of the nationalist way of life but not the courage to live it, could it be because an iscot would not provide the way of life he prefers along with all of the benefits.

On the plus side I suppose he and the rest of us can pack all the kids up north to the iscots univ for free places. That's if the EU would have them.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I absolutely agree and it is good that Osborne and the other party leaders have made their standpoint clear - it needed said as now the YES have to make their position clear - at least there is now something to be debated.  It's then up to the voters to decide whether they believe that what Osborne and co. say would be the actual outcome in the event...

And in truth whilst there are issues that the YES campaign are less than clear about *I am not sure that from a NO perspective I have heard what BT is offering either.  Are they offering the status quo or not?  I don't know*.  If they are, then can Osborne and Cameron just come out and say as they have on the 'sterling-zone' that nothing will change short-medium term in all current arrangements Westminster has with Scotland.

And at least that will inform a proper debate also.
		
Click to expand...

This is sort of the point I'm making SILH.

Why is the onus on the existing UK government to come up with all the answers as they are not the ones seeking "change"?

Salmond and the SNP, on the other hand, are asking people to make a huge decision without presenting anything close to resembling facts as to what sort of country people are voting for?  

I just think you have the focus on who should be providing answers back to front........


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Why has SLH  not moved north. He has such love of the nationalist way of life but not the courage to live it, could it be because an iscot would not provide the way of life he prefers along with all of the benefits.

On the plus side I suppose he and the rest of us can pack all the kids up north to the iscots univ for free places. That's if the EU would have them.
		
Click to expand...

I don't have a love of the nationalist way of life.  As much as I would like to hear honesty from the YES campaign I also want a bit more honesty and clarity from Westminster to inform the debate.  And today's intervention is a good thing.

If I wanted to move back to Scotland I can't due to the wishes and circumstances of my immediate family at the moment - and sometimes listening to what many chippy, uninformed and whinging Scots say about England and the English I am not so sure I'd ever want to in any case


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			This is sort of the point I'm making SILH.

Why is the onus on the existing UK government to come up with all the answers as they are not the ones seeking "change"?

Salmond and the SNP, on the other hand, are asking people to make a huge decision without presenting anything close to resembling facts as to what sort of country people are voting for?  

I just think you have the focus on who should be providing answers back to front........
		
Click to expand...

Yes but surely the Scots voters have to know what a NO vote means as much as what a YES vote means.  If NO means 'no change' then they should just be told that - what is so difficult about doing that.  It would certainly make things clearer and perhaps easier for the BT Campaign to sell - getting rid of suspicions that are held about what might happen following a NO.  These suspicions just play into the hands of the YES campaign.  

Of course the BT campaign and Westminster don't have to say a thing about life for Scotland post a NO - but by keeping schtum I don't think it helps their case - it simply fuels suspicions.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes but surely the Scots voters have to know what a NO vote means as much as what a YES vote means.  If NO means 'no change' then they should just be told that - what is so difficult about doing that.  It would certainly make things clearer and perhaps easier for the BT Campaign to sell - getting rid of suspicions that are held about what might happen following a NO.  These suspicions just play into the hands of the YES campaign.  

Of course the BT campaign and Westminster don't have to say a thing about life for Scotland post a NO - but by keeping schtum I don't think it helps their case - it simply fuels suspicions.
		
Click to expand...

A no vote means Scotland stays as part of the UK and nothing changes 

It's Scotland that wants change so they can do the talking 

If people vote No then what should change ? Nothing is the answer 

Lots of demands from people - the current government don't have to say anything - it's not their campaign


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Westminster cannot give the assurances that you want because they have to sit on the fence as :

a.  They are unsure how the RGB will react to an iscot yes vote.
b.  As the SNP have not laid out any facts about how an iscot will work they cannot counter anything.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 13, 2014)

My NO vote is a vote for the status quo.

The status quo is that we all live and cooperate together within a union whose precise culture, economy, constitution etc have always and will continue to evolve....

I really don't see any need for "Better Together" to attempt to define their position any further than that....


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			My NO vote is a vote for the status quo.

The status quo is that we all live and cooperate together within a union whose precise culture, economy, constitution etc have always and will continue to evolve....

I really don't see any need for "Better Together" to attempt to define their position any further than that....
		
Click to expand...

Summed up perfectly :thup:

Hoping your view is part of the majority


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 13, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			My NO vote is a vote for the status quo.

The status quo is that we all live and cooperate together within a union whose precise culture, economy, constitution etc have always and will continue to evolve....

I really don't see any need for "Better Together" to attempt to define their position any further than that....
		
Click to expand...

Hurrah, sense!! :thup:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 13, 2014)

I think this is fascinating.It's the 13th of February and BT have just played their ace card.For a referendum in September.That's seven months away. They've shot their bolt early, haven't they?

And what is being lost in the noise today is these announcements from the unholy trinity are reactions to Treasury advice on how to arrange a currency union.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Since when did British Telecom have a say in it all


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 13, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I think this is fascinating.It's the 13th of February and BT have just played their ace card.For a referendum in September.That's seven months away. They've shot their bolt early, haven't they?

And what is being lost in the noise today is these announcements from the unholy trinity are reactions to Treasury advice on how to arrange a currency union.
		
Click to expand...

Or it gives Salmond more time to tie himself in knots trying to work out what they can/will do.........  If he cannot come up with something plausable then there is more time for people to realise.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 13, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Or it gives Salmond more time to tie himself in knots trying to work out what they can/will do.........  If he cannot come up with something plausable then there is more time for people to realise.
		
Click to expand...

True.I doubt anyone who had decided to vote yes will change their mind, we're a pretty stubborn lot.So they're looking at the undecided voters.Will they be concerned by this announcement and veer towards voting No, or take umbrage with being told their currency will be removed?A delicate balancing act, and one I think Yes will spin to one of bullying Scotland, something that never goes down well.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 13, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			True.I doubt anyone who had decided to vote yes will change their mind, we're a pretty stubborn lot.So they're looking at the undecided voters.Will they be concerned by this announcement and veer towards voting No, or take umbrage with being told their currency will be removed?A delicate balancing act, and one I think Yes will spin to one of bullying Scotland, something that never goes down well.
		
Click to expand...

It was half tongue in cheek really.  I also think if they pulled this out at the last minute Salmond/SNP/Yes would feign absolute outrage which, so close to the referendum, could have more of an impact.

The way I see it is that UK are stating their position now to give a consistent message from here on in whilst Salmond/SNP/Yes are going to have to react to every avenue that is blocked off.

Would you like to see Salmond spending more time in Westminster trying to iron things out?  Genuinely interested in the view of an avowed Yes voter


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			or take umbrage with being told their currency will be removed?A delicate balancing act, and one I think Yes will spin to one of bullying Scotland, something that never goes down well.
		
Click to expand...

Westminster - damned if they get involved and damned if they don't. 

Lets hope that the England footie team don't cock it up and win the World Cup, that would mean a certain yes vote. :mmm:


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Westminster - damned if they get involved and damned if they don't. 

Lets hope that the England footie team don't cock it up and win the World Cup, that would mean a certain yes vote. :mmm:
		
Click to expand...

Lol - Salmond missed a trick by not staging the referendum DURING the world cup, when our anti-English fervour will be at its highest.... Won't take too many Clive Tyldesley commentaries to change even my vote......


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			A no vote means Scotland stays as part of the UK and nothing changes 

It's Scotland that wants change so they can do the talking 

If people vote No then what should change ? Nothing is the answer 

Lots of demands from people - the current government don't have to say anything - it's not their campaign
		
Click to expand...

If NO means nothing changes then fine - let's hear Cameron say it.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Westminster - damned if they get involved and damned if they don't. 

Lets hope that the England footie team don't cock it up and win the World Cup, that would mean a certain yes vote. :mmm:
		
Click to expand...

Don't worry that is even less likely than Scotland winning the Six Nations !


----------



## EuanRoss (Feb 13, 2014)

The problem with the whole campaign is just that there is far too much spin. Why is Sturgeon (a horrible horrible creature) coming out and saying that it's the No campaign trying to bully Scotland by saying there will be no currency union? Don't say that, say what you are going to do about it. It's clearly been a bedrock of the independence movement that there would be currency union and now the UK has said that there will not be. Get over it and come up with a proposal.

The other thing that is making me fed up is the Yes campaign constantly saying what they would do if independence came about and challenging the No campaign to say what they will do if it doesn't. By it's very definition, a No vote is one for the status quo and thus the No campaign doesn't have to propose to do anything should they win, just carry on as things are. 

This is far too big a decision for spin and political point scoring to be the order of the day, just wish that both sides would present their arguments in a clear and concise fashion instead of spending half their time harping on about the other lot (especially the Yes campaign)


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			My NO vote is a vote for the status quo.

The status quo is that we all live and cooperate together within a union whose precise culture, economy, constitution etc have always and will continue to evolve....

I really don't see any need for "Better Together" to attempt to define their position any further than that....
		
Click to expand...

So you are not bothered that there might in the future be changes in Scottish representation at Westminster, changes to Barnett formula leading to reduction in funding, EU status - well OK.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 13, 2014)

EuanRoss said:



			The problem with the whole campaign is just that there is far too much spin. Why is Sturgeon (a horrible horrible creature) coming out and saying that it's the No campaign trying to bully Scotland by saying there will be no currency union? Don't say that, say what you are going to do about it. It's clearly been a bedrock of the independence movement that there would be currency union and now the UK has said that there will not be. Get over it and come up with a proposal.

The other thing that is making me fed up is the Yes campaign constantly saying what they would do if independence came about and challenging the No campaign to say what they will do if it doesn't. By it's very definition, a No vote is one for the status quo and thus the No campaign doesn't have to propose to do anything should they win, just carry on as things are. 

This is far too big a decision for spin and political point scoring to be the order of the day, just wish that both sides would present their arguments in a clear and concise fashion instead of spending half their time harping on about the other lot (especially the Yes campaign)
		
Click to expand...

For the second time today, Hurrah!!!!  Sensible posts aren't welcome here though.......


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So you are not bothered that there might in the future be changes in Scottish representation at Westminster, changes to Barnett formula leading to reduction in funding, EU status - well OK.
		
Click to expand...

That could come about without this vote as part of a proposal at any time........?


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			If NO means nothing changes then fine - let's hear Cameron say it.
		
Click to expand...

He doesn't need to, as has been previously stated it's down to Salmond.  An announcement of a swathe of sweeping changes in the event of a NO vote would indicate that there are serious problems with the union that HMG aren't currently addressing - hardly a good idea.

By saying nothing he is clearly indicating a status quo.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			If NO means nothing changes then fine - let's hear Cameron say it.
		
Click to expand...


He has no need to say it 

It's not his campaign - he doesn't have to satisfy any demands from people 

It doesn't matter to you does it - you have made yourself home in England 

But I would take it if he has said nothing it means nothing will change :thup:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 13, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Would you like to see Salmond spending more time in Westminster trying to iron things out?  Genuinely interested in the view of an avowed Yes voter
		
Click to expand...

I'd like to see Salmond down there and Cameron up here on a regular basis, this is pretty big stuff and all this mud throwing is doing no one any good.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 13, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'd like to see Salmond down there and Cameron up here on a regular basis, this is pretty big stuff and all this mud throwing is doing no one any good.
		
Click to expand...

100% agree, regardless of your views (with or without a vote).

Hope it happens, I fear it won't and Salmond will continue to reduce it to a political points scoring exercise through trying to entice Cameron et al into TV debates etc


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			He has no need to say it 

It's not his campaign - he doesn't have to satisfy any demands from people 

*It doesn't matter to you does it - you have made yourself home in England 
*
But I would take it if he has said nothing it means nothing will change :thup:
		
Click to expand...

I'm somewhat biased, but I've always considered those that have left their Country of Birth are often more concerned/aware about it - and their Country of Residence - than those who haven't.

Otherwise I agree.

As for Bullying. I would imagine Ms Sturgeon has some experience in that area!


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Daily Politics might be interesting today. The lady herself has appeared.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So you are not bothered that there might in the future be changes in Scottish representation at Westminster, changes to Barnett formula leading to reduction in funding, EU status - well OK.
		
Click to expand...

Lots of things "might" happen regardless of how the vote goes so, no, I'm not losing any sleep over any of that...


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Daily Politics might be interesting today. The lady herself has appeared.
		
Click to expand...

We are all a bunch of bullies and iscot will continue to use the Â£ if we like it or not.


----------



## lex! (Feb 13, 2014)

EuanRoss said:



			The problem with the whole campaign is just that there is far too much spin. Why is Sturgeon (a horrible horrible creature)
		
Click to expand...

Have to confess that I have always had a soft spot for her (and no, it's not a bog in Westruther)


----------



## titleistho (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			A no vote means Scotland stays as part of the UK and nothing changes 

It's Scotland that wants change so they can do the talking 

If people vote No then what should change ? Nothing is the answer 

Lots of demands from people - the current government don't have to say anything - it's not their campaign
		
Click to expand...




stevie_r said:



			He doesn't need to, as has been previously stated it's down to Salmond. An announcement of a swathe of sweeping changes in the event of a NO vote would indicate that there are serious problems with the union that HMG aren't currently addressing - hardly a good idea.

By saying nothing he is clearly indicating a status quo.
		
Click to expand...

two good posts!

Salmond and Sturgeon are twisting everything they can, anyone with a modicum of sense will surely see past this- I do have buddies who are in the snp and it's frightening the unwavering belief they have, founded on nothing more than another mans unsubstanciated fantasies


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 13, 2014)

lex! said:



			Have to confess that I have always had a soft spot for her (and no, it's not a bog in Westruther)
		
Click to expand...

I have to physically restrain my wife from attacking the television whenever her face appears on it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 13, 2014)

It seems there is a simple solution to the Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£.

English banknotes just say 'pounds' whereas Scottish banknotes say 'pounds sterling'.
dUK can keep pounds and iScotland can keep pounds sterling.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			It seems there is a simple solution to the Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£.

English banknotes just say 'pounds' whereas Scottish banknotes say 'pounds sterling'.
dUK can keep pounds and iScotland can keep pounds sterling.
		
Click to expand...

I think it will be the groat, or possibly some form of bartering system.  My subs next year will be 4 goats and a small terrier with two chickens as change.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			We are all a bunch of bullies and iscot will continue to use the Â£ if we like it or not.
		
Click to expand...

Entirely possible.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 13, 2014)

Well according to the Lady that harassed folk on Dundas St with the 'Big Issue' for years (has she retired yet?) it's either the 'Poond' or 'Justerpoond'!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			It seems there is a simple solution to the Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£.

English banknotes just say 'pounds' whereas Scottish banknotes say 'pounds sterling'.
dUK can keep pounds and iScotland can keep pounds sterling.
		
Click to expand...

Or possibly create your own currency and don't be dependant on a country or government you want nothing to do with 

That way the UK can carry on having their currency and Scotland can deal in sheep or join the Eurozone :thup:


----------



## lex! (Feb 13, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well according to the Lady that harassed folk on Dundas St with the 'Big Issue' for years (has she retired yet?) it's either the 'Poond' or 'Justerpoond'! 

Click to expand...

Lol! That brings back memories. 'I'll catch yer on yer way back'.


----------



## lex! (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Or possibly create your own currency and don't be dependant on a country or government you want nothing to do with 

That way the UK can carry on having their currency and Scotland can deal in sheep or join the Eurozone :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Wasn't the pound 'a mill stone' not so long ago, and the euro an answer to all his prayers?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 13, 2014)

lex! said:



			Wasn't the pound 'a mill stone' not so long ago, and the euro an answer to all his prayers?
		
Click to expand...

I believe that not so long ago Mr Salmond claimed that an independent Scotland would be better off within Europe and the Eurozone.

My, how times change.


----------



## MarkA (Feb 13, 2014)

Surely,Independence is independence , meaning borders, independent governance, funding  and a separate currency ?
You can't just have the nice,easy bits and leave the awkward bits for the rest of the UK to pick up. 
Why the hell should Westminster let a cowboy like Salmond loose and support his ecomonic and fiscal decisions and their ramifications with the Bank of England?
Without Sterling, Scotland would turn into another Albania


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 13, 2014)

lex! said:



			Lol! That brings back memories. 'I'll catch yer on yer way back'.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:

That's the one!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 13, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			I believe that not so long ago Mr Salmond claimed that an independent Scotland would be better off within Europe and the Eurozone.

My, how times change.
		
Click to expand...

They sure have, I remember when you could buy Euros for 70p.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They sure have, I remember when you could buy Euros for 70p.
		
Click to expand...

He said it last year. Euros for 70p was a lot longer ago than that.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I'm somewhat biased, but I've always considered those that have left their Country of Birth are often more concerned/aware about it - and their Country of Residence - than those who haven't.
		
Click to expand...

Quite - being away from it all we are not immersed in all the total and often rather pathetic and vitriolic nonsense that many Scots spout about England and the English.  As 'outsiders' who often maintain a keen interest in what is going on 'back home' - as I do for family reasons - we can have quite a different perspective on matters with us living out in the wider world (if you can call England part of that)


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They sure have, I remember when you could buy Euros for 70p.
		
Click to expand...

Well you will be alright then once you are all in that economic Utopia that is the Eurozone with control of your economy in the hands of Frankfurt.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Lots of things "might" happen regardless of how the vote goes so, no, I'm not losing any sleep over any of that...
		
Click to expand...

And lots of things "might" happen after a YES vote - and the YES team are correctly being pressed to be precise about them.  Though for many questions they can only predict what will be and what they'd like to be because they don't know what the world will be like post a YES in 2016.  So it's all about what might happen both ways.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

lex! said:



			Have to confess that I have always had a soft spot for her (and no, it's not a bog in Westruther)
		
Click to expand...

wot? You got as wee thing for Daphne Broon?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Or possibly create your own currency and don't be dependant on a country or government you want nothing to do with
		
Click to expand...

And so an iScotland will hand back Trident to us - as an iScotland wouldn't want rUK to be dependant upon them.  Fair enough - Portsmouth needs the work.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

MarkA said:



			Without Sterling, Scotland would turn into another Albania
		
Click to expand...

Possible - obviously - as nothing is impossible - but you really think it likely?


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And so an iScotland will hand back Trident to us - as an iScotland wouldn't want rUK to be dependant upon them.  Fair enough - Portsmouth needs the work.
		
Click to expand...

Trident will have to leave iscot as it would be unthinkable for RUKs nuclear deterant being based on foreign soil. And it won't be to Portsmouth.


----------



## MarkA (Feb 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Possible - obviously - as nothing is impossible - but you really think it likely?
		
Click to expand...

Well entry into the Euro is far from assured given the tests required by Brussels and has Scotland really got a stable enough economy the financial reserves to weather the turbulence in the world markets - in a word No!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 13, 2014)

MarkA said:



			Well entry into the Euro is far from assured given the tests required by Brussels and has Scotland really got a stable enough economy the financial reserves to weather the turbulence in the world markets - in a word No!
		
Click to expand...

Well if they go for it and find themselves in that hole - good luck to them.  But 25yrs down the line when they have dug themselves out of that hole I guess we shouldn't expect any favours from them.  And meanwhile as we let them fall apart (with no impact on rUK economy) I'm thinking they won't really see us as very helpful or friendly neighbours.  That's going to be fun,


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And so an iScotland will hand back Trident to us - as an iScotland wouldn't want rUK to be dependant upon them.  Fair enough - Portsmouth needs the work.
		
Click to expand...

It's UK - there is no such place a rUK and there won't be afterwards - it will still be UK

And yes we can keep our trident and our currency and our armed forces - in fact we can have everything and Scotland can be truly independent and create everything from scratch 

And then you will need to apply for a visa to work in England or anywhere in the UK or go back and find work in the newly formed Independant country of Scotland


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well if they go for it and find themselves in that hole - good luck to them.  But 25yrs down the line when they have dug themselves out of that hole I guess we shouldn't expect any favours from them.  And meanwhile as we let them fall apart (with no impact on rUK economy) I'm thinking they won't really see us as very helpful or friendly neighbours.  That's going to be fun,
		
Click to expand...

So they would want to be Independent from us but also expect us to help them ?

Sorry but no - one or the other 

And If there is a yes vote the conditions won't be driven from some people from Salmond - they will be driven by UK government and what is best for us and not for an Independent Scotland


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And then you will need to apply for a visa to work in England or anywhere in the UK or go back and find work in the newly formed Independant country of Scotland
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure we would be that big a bully but a citizenship course and exam may be required


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I'm not sure we would be that big a bully but a citizenship course and exam may be required 

Click to expand...


If they want to be fully independent then we will treat them the same as all the others 

Visas to work for a certain period or they go home


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 13, 2014)

Interesting piece in the Business section of today's Telegraph. According to OPEC North Sea oil production has over recent years fallen to levels much lower than turn of century and this year is expected fall further to pre 1978 levels.

Independence or not this is surely a cause of concern for us all.


----------



## lex! (Feb 13, 2014)

Keeping my ear to the ground, I predict a NO vote, about 75-25.


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And then you will need to apply for a visa to work in England or anywhere in the UK or go back and find work in the newly formed Independant country of Scotland
		
Click to expand...

Not if it is part of Europe, as there will be open borders in regards to work and entry for EU Citizens, the same as it is in the rest of Europe.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			If they want to be fully independent then we will treat them the same as all the others 

Visas to work for a certain period or they go home
		
Click to expand...

I am not sure that the thousands of English folk working in Scotland would agree with that.


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			If they want to be fully independent then we will treat them the same as all the others 

Visas to work for a certain period or they go home
		
Click to expand...

See my previous post.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			Not if it is part of Europe, as there will be open borders in regards to work and entry for EU Citizens, the same as it is in the rest of Europe.
		
Click to expand...

They have to be admitted first :thup: 

Heard some say they don't also want Scotland to be part of NATO also

It looks like some just want to cherry pick exactly what they want


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I am not sure that the thousands of English folk working in Scotland would agree with that.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sure they will be flooding back into England to instead of risking the Euro :thup:


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			They have to be admitted first :thup: 

Heard some say they don't also want Scotland to be part of NATO also

It looks like some just want to cherry pick exactly what they want
		
Click to expand...

And how likely is it that they wont be admitted? Afterall they are already in it now so to speak, they obviously dont wish to be part of NATO as they then wont have to send troops on peacekeeping missions etc so wont need as large an army. So save money in a fashion, although they will obviously have to then pay them the dole if they intend to decrease military numbers. Who would want to invade them anyways? And if they did then the UK would obviously step in as its a threat to them also.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			And how likely is it that they wont be admitted? Afterall they are already in it now so to speak, they obviously dont wish to be part of NATO as they then wont have to send troops on peacekeeping missions etc so wont need as large an army. So save money in a fashion, although they will obviously have to then pay them the dole if they intend to decrease military numbers. Who would want to invade them anyways? And if they did then the UK would obviously step in as its a threat to them also.
		
Click to expand...

Well the waters around Scotland also form part of current NATO ship patrols in the North Sea and Atlantic

Either patrol is themselves including the skies or be part of NATO ( after they have built their boats and planes or bought them from someone )

And would UK step in or would we lock our borders up and protect ourselves ?

Again leave them to fend for themselves - got to see them being truly independent :thup:


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

The terms of entry to the Eurozone for new entrants is to sign up for the â‚¬ so you really don't need the Â£.


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Well the waters around Scotland also form part of current NATO ship patrols in the North Sea and Atlantic

Either patrol is themselves including the skies or be part of NATO ( after they have built their boats and planes or bought them from someone )

And would UK step in or would we lock our borders up and protect ourselves ?

Again leave them to fend for themselves - got to see them being truly independent :thup:
		
Click to expand...

And why would they not be allowed to retain certain shops and planes and other weapons and stuff? The residents if Scotland did pay tax contributions that paid for the entire Uk arsenal and fleet of planes and ships. So therefore are entitled to a percentage of that.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			And how likely is it that they wont be admitted? Afterall they are already in it now so to speak, *they obviously dont wish to be part of NATO* as they then wont have to send troops on peacekeeping missions etc so wont need as large an army. So save money in a fashion, although they will obviously have to then pay them the dole if they intend to decrease military numbers. Who would want to invade them anyways? And if they did then the UK would obviously step in as its a threat to them also.
		
Click to expand...

Pretty sure that Salmond's position is that he would want Scotland to be a part of NATO


----------



## MarkE (Feb 13, 2014)

What do the Scots actually want from all this. I'm no expert, but it seems to me the overriding reason is just to be free from England. They may want out of the UK, but will still be part of the British Isles and thereby will still be Britons, like the rest of us. Seems like a classic case of cutting your nose off to spite you face. They seem to want to go it alone but to cherry pick the bits they want to keep i.e the Pound. They'll be telling us next they expect to carry on using English as their native language.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			And why would they not be allowed to retain certain shops and planes and other weapons and stuff? The residents if Scotland did pay tax contributions that paid for the entire Uk arsenal and fleet of planes and ships. So therefore are entitled to a percentage of that.
		
Click to expand...

Because they are going on their own IMO 

They can start from scratch as far as I'm concerned 

They remove any right to anything owned by uk taxpayers the minute they decide to leave the UK

They should be allowed to pick and choose what they take - any entitlements cease the minute they stop paying tax and leave


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Because they are going on their own IMO 

They can start from scratch as far as I'm concerned 

They remove any right to anything owned by uk taxpayers the minute they decide to leave the UK

They should be allowed to pick and choose what they take - any entitlements cease the minute they stop paying tax and leave
		
Click to expand...

If they dont wish to be a part of the UK any longer that is their choice, the fact still stands they contributed as much towards the UK as Wales, England and NI did, so therefore they have an entitlement to a percentage of the items owned by the UK as a whole. 

What you are suggesting is "if you dont wanna play my way then im taking my ball back" lol


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 13, 2014)

Just to clarify a few points there have been several polls about the important issues of independence and as a rough guide I have listed them.
You will see that defense and currency feature quite low.

The Economy
Pensions
Welfare
Relationship with rUK
Currency
Immigration
Energy
Defense
Relationship with EU
Broadcasting.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			If they dont wish to be a part of the UK any longer that is their choice, the fact still stands they contributed as much towards the UK as Wales, England and NI did, so therefore they have an entitlement to a percentage of the items owned by the UK as a whole. 

What you are suggesting is "if you dont wanna play my way then im taking my ball back" lol
		
Click to expand...

Yep 

If they no longer wish to be part of this great combined kingdom then they can walk away with nothing

Sorry but they paid for the running of the armed forces etc so when they leave they can pay for the running of their own armed forces and get their own equipment and get their own personel 

They will have nothing from the UK because they have no  wish to be a part of us - they cant pick and choose what they take  ( as per that white paper nonsense ) - and yes that includes the debt - they get none of that

So they start with nothing from us and be truely independent and have nothing to do with the rest of the UK - as they so wish


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Just to clarify a few points there have been several polls about the important issues of independence and as a rough guide I have listed them.
You will see that defense and currency feature quite low.

The Economy
Pensions
Welfare
Relationship with rUK
Currency
Immigration
Energy
Defense
Relationship with EU
Broadcasting.
		
Click to expand...


Isnt the Economy and Pensions purely dependent on the currency

Again - no such place as rUK - its UK and will continue to be UK with or without Scotland


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Yep 

If they no longer wish to be part of this great combined kingdom then they can walk away with nothing

Sorry but they paid for the running of the armed forces etc so when they leave they can pay for the running of their own armed forces and get their own equipment and get their own personel 

They will have nothing from the UK because they have no  wish to be a part of us - they cant pick and choose what they take  ( as per that white paper nonsense ) - and yes that includes the debt - they get none of that

So they start with nothing from us and be truely independent and have nothing to do with the rest of the UK - as they so wish
		
Click to expand...

Well if they are getting away debt free then that's better than having a few tatty old ships or planes lol. They will probably be better equipped after 5 years than the Uk lol 

Especially as the rUK debt levels would rise substantially as there would be less to pay it off. Plus if the iScotland were to lower the VAT rate and duty on goods even by a small percentage they will boost their economy with the influx of Northern English looking to save. Just like the Irish do into Northern Ireland for goods and the Northern Irish do into the Republic for fuel. 

Plus if they get into Europe the rUk cannot restrict the transportation of goods into iScotland via rUK roads either.


----------



## MarkA (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It's UK - there is no such place a rUK and there won't be afterwards - it will still be UK

And yes we can keep our trident and our currency and our armed forces - in fact we can have everything and Scotland can be truly independent and create everything from scratch 

And then you will need to apply for a visa to work in England or anywhere in the UK or go back and find work in the newly formed Independant country of Scotland
		
Click to expand...

You'll get a similar situation with Northern Ireland and Eire - Loose Border controls and even laxer Econonic governance with the Eire economy having virtually self destructed due to the Euro and requiring the EU and the UK to bail them out due to the inherent weakness of their banking systems ( which mirrors Scotland) and Northern Ireland relatively stable in the sterling though with slightly other pressures


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Isnt the Economy and Pensions purely dependent on the currency

Again - no such place as rUK - its UK and will continue to be UK with or without Scotland
		
Click to expand...

Keep up.........how can it be united when there is only one Kingdom left.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			Well if they are getting away debt free then that's better than having a few tatty old ships or planes lol. They will probably be better equipped after 5 years than the Uk lol 

Especially as their debt levels would rise substantially as there would be less to pay it off. Plus if they lower the VAT rate and duty on goods even by a small percentage they will boost their economy with the influx of Northern English looking to save. Just like the Irish do into Northern Ireland for goods and the Northern Irish do into the Republic for fuel. 

Plus if they get into Europe the Uk cannot restrict the transportation of goods into Scotland via UK roads either.
		
Click to expand...

Sounds good to me - shall be fun watching them try


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Keep up.........how can it be united when there is only one Kingdom left.
		
Click to expand...

Have you told Wales and N Ireland they dont count


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Sounds good to me - shall be fun watching them try
		
Click to expand...

There is no way that the EU will allow rUK to stop the iScottish from taking goods into the free state lol

you think there will be another Hadrians Wall and a crowd of rUK folks patrolling it, you have been watching too much Game of Thrones if you think that lol


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			There is no way that the EU will allow rUK to stop the iScottish from taking goods into the free state lol

you think there will be another Hadrians Wall and a crowd of rUK folks patrolling it, you have been watching too much Game of Thrones if you think that lol
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but its UK - no such place as rUK



Never said anything about goods being stopped or Hadrians Wall etc


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Sorry but its UK - no such place as rUK



Never said anything about goods being stopped or Hadrians Wall etc
		
Click to expand...

you are correct there is no rUK but there will be after there becomes an iScotland.

And your post incinuated there would be trouble if the iScottish try to drive on rUK roads, hence my response.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			And why would they not be allowed to retain certain shops and planes and other weapons and stuff? The residents if Scotland did pay tax contributions that paid for the entire Uk arsenal and fleet of planes and ships. So therefore are entitled to a percentage of that.
		
Click to expand...

You can keep the shops. Now about the hardware. As you are not giving the vote to those who currently use the gear, what makes you think they would wish to become nationalist all of a sudden and move up to iscot.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			you are correct there is no rUK but there will be after there becomes an iScotland.

And your post incinuated there would be trouble if the iScottish try to drive on rUK roads, hence my response.
		
Click to expand...


After Scotland leave ( well thats IF they do ) it will still be called UK - 

There is still 3 kingdoms united together - that makes it - United Kingdom

They are still UK roads - just Scotland is no longer a part of the UK

I would personally builod tolls on the roads in from Scotland


----------



## EuanRoss (Feb 13, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			I have to physically restrain my wife from attacking the television whenever her face appears on it.
		
Click to expand...


My mother is the same. She works for the NHS and has never forgiven her for some of the things she said when she was health secretary.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I would personally builod tolls on the roads in from Scotland
		
Click to expand...

On occasions Phil, you do come out with some utter cobblers


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			On occasions Phil, you do come out with some utter cobblers 

Click to expand...


 

Good way to raise funds for the UK


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



 

Good way to raise funds for the UK 

Click to expand...

That's rUK to you.....


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			That's rUK to you..... 



Click to expand...

:rofl:

So will many look to immigrate from Scotland into England if there is a Yes ?


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			What you are suggesting is "if you dont wanna play my way then im taking my ball back" lol
		
Click to expand...

Bad analogy imo. 

What LpP is suggesting is more along the lines of 'Go find another game!'

@DfT. Immigration appears relatively low too. Presumably it's buried somewhere in the White Paper, but I cba trawling through to find it, but...

Can you explain how the Passport situation and the relationship to EU is going to work for the period Scotland isn't in the EU - assuming, reasonably, that there will be a qualification period. 

Scots will no longer qualify for a UK Passport - so will have their own. What will be the rights of EU Passport Holders already in Scotland and Scottish Passport holders in EU Zone - which also means rUK - be. If there's actually equivalence, then Scotland has extraordinary access to EU Zone without any of the other (fiscal etc) controls that apply to EU. Not necessarily a bad thing for an interim period, but could be truly chaotic, and unmanageable Border/Entry-wise - there would have to be some sort of control on rUK/Scotland Borders - at least in 1 direction.

Of course, if Scots continue to be granted a UK Passport, that's not actually independence is it!


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			That's rUK to you..... 



Click to expand...

anything to keep those bloody howling pipes in iscot.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			anything to keep those bloody howling pipes in iscot.
		
Click to expand...

I think it was a Spike Milligan character who described then perfectly for me...

'What is that burning noise?'!


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Bad analogy imo. 

What LpP is suggesting is more along the lines of 'Go find another game!'
		
Click to expand...

it got my point across IN MY OPINION lol

same bus different window as they say


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			Well if they are getting away debt free then that's better than having a few tatty old ships or planes lol. They will probably be better equipped after 5 years than the Uk lol 

Especially as the rUK debt levels would rise substantially as there would be less to pay it off. Plus if the iScotland were to lower the VAT rate and duty on goods even by a small percentage they will boost their economy with the influx of Northern English looking to save. Just like the Irish do into Northern Ireland for goods and the Northern Irish do into the Republic for fuel. 

Plus if they get into Europe the rUk cannot restrict the transportation of goods into iScotland via rUK roads either.
		
Click to expand...

Where do you get the idea that an independent Scotland would start with a clear balance sheet? There will, aside from anything else, be outstanding debt on infrastructure.

Plus the current time is not a good one to be citing any advantages to be gained by copying the Republic's economy. In any event it is very difficult to see how a country whose economy is going to apparently based upon one shrinking resource, oil, can afford to reduce VAT & duty levels. Particularly as, sterling or euro, it will not have control of its fiscal policy.


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			After Scotland leave ( well thats IF they do ) it will still be called UK - 

There is still 3 kingdoms united together - that makes it - United Kingdom

They are still UK roads - just Scotland is no longer a part of the UK

I would personally builod tolls on the roads in from Scotland
		
Click to expand...

no it will be rUK as in revised, restructured and reshaped, oh and tolls will be one thing but then they must charge the same to all, if they charge tolls they will throttle the road networks into Northern Ireland massively as 90% of good enter via Stranraer


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Where do you get the idea that an independent Scotland would start with a clear balance sheet? There will, aside from anything else, be outstanding debt on infrastructure.

Plus the current time is not a good one to be citing any advantages to be gained by copying the Republic's economy. In any event it is very difficult to see how a country whose economy is going to apparently based upon one shrinking resource, oil, can afford to reduce VAT & duty levels. Particularly as, sterling or euro, it will not have control of its fiscal policy.
		
Click to expand...

Liverpool Phil is giving them a debt free start mate, not me lol i am only responding to his dreams lol


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 13, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Bad analogy imo. 

What LpP is suggesting is more along the lines of 'Go find another game!'

@DfT. Immigration appears relatively low too. Presumably it's buried somewhere in the White Paper, but I cba trawling through to find it, but...

Can you explain how the Passport situation and the relationship to EU is going to work for the period Scotland isn't in the EU - assuming, reasonably, that there will be a qualification period. 

Scots will no longer qualify for a UK Passport - so will have their own. What will be the rights of EU Passport Holders already in Scotland and Scottish Passport holders in EU Zone - which also means rUK - be. If there's actually equivalence, then Scotland has extraordinary access to EU Zone without any of the other (fiscal etc) controls that apply to EU. Not necessarily a bad thing for an interim period, but could be truly chaotic, and unmanageable Border/Entry-wise - there would have to be some sort of control on rUK/Scotland Borders - at least in 1 direction.

Of course, if Scots continue to be granted a UK Passport, that's not actually independence is it!
		
Click to expand...

I think most of that was in the Edinburgh agreement.
IF there is a yes vote it will take at least 2/3 years to sort out. 

That's why today's bluster by the Chancellor is being seen for what it really is in Scotland.
In the unlikely event of a yes vote you would see a sharp re defining of todays comments.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Where do you get the idea that an independent Scotland would start with a clear balance sheet? There will, aside from anything else, be outstanding debt on infrastructure.
.
		
Click to expand...

He doesn't, just see's a good wind up when he see's one. He just wants to play with his infraction button before he goes back to his Jamison's.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			no it will be rUK as in revised, restructured and reshaped, oh and tolls will be one thing but then they must charge the same to all, if they charge tolls they will throttle the road networks into Northern Ireland massively as 90% of good enter via Stranraer
		
Click to expand...

Who says it will be called that ? - is this written down in that white paper ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 13, 2014)

BTW
rUK is a bit more polite than 'them'.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			Liverpool Phil is giving them a debt free start mate, not me lol i am only responding to his dreams lol
		
Click to expand...

The only dreams is that novel Salmond calls a white paper

At the end of the day it's not going to happen - the yes vote won't happen but with some of the anti English attitude I have witnessed in recent months I'm now quite sad about that.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think most of that was in the Edinburgh agreement.
IF there is a yes vote it will take at least 2/3 years to sort out. 

That's why today's bluster by the Chancellor is being seen for what it really is in Scotland.
In the unlikely event of a yes vote you would see a sharp re defining of todays comments.
		
Click to expand...

So a few weeks ago the YES campaign  demanded answers from Westminster and now when they get one it is dismissed as bluster and bullying.

You couldn't make it up.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That's why today's bluster by the Chancellor is being seen for what it really is in Scotland.
In the unlikely event of a yes vote you would see a sharp re defining of todays comments.
		
Click to expand...

Not a chance, it would be political suicide. Any political party that try's to reverse what was said today might just see the RUK version of an Arab Spring.  We this side don't want a split but if the people of Scotland decide that's what they want then so be it but don't expect us just to roll over and let iscot keep the best bits.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Nice to see Babcock and BAE meeting in the SW today


----------



## Phil2511 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The only dreams is that novel Salmond calls a white paper

At the end of the day it's not going to happen - the yes vote won't happen but with some of the anti English attitude I have witnessed in recent months I'm now quite sad about that.
		
Click to expand...

Then why are you so obsessed with it lol


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

Phil2511 said:



			Then why are you so obsessed with it lol
		
Click to expand...


It's a debate isn't it ? It's quite amusing at times


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think most of that was in the Edinburgh agreement.
IF there is a yes vote it will take at least 2/3 years to sort out. 

That's why today's bluster by the Chancellor is being seen for what it really is in Scotland.
In the unlikely event of a yes vote you would see a sharp re defining of todays comments.
		
Click to expand...

Do you mean the Edinburgh Agreement as a consequence of the Danish rejection of Maastricht Treaty? Denmark was a member of EU then, Scotland wouldn't be. An interim agreement/wind up/down?

Or the Edinburgh agreement about how to conduct the Referendum?


----------



## ger147 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			After Scotland leave ( well thats IF they do ) it will still be called UK - 

There is still 3 kingdoms united together - that makes it - United Kingdom

They are still UK roads - just Scotland is no longer a part of the UK

I would personally builod tolls on the roads in from Scotland
		
Click to expand...

1 Kingdom, 1 Principality and 1 Province, not 3 Kingdoms.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

ger147 said:



			1 Kingdom, 1 Principality and 1 Province, not 3 Kingdoms.
		
Click to expand...


So still United Kingdom regardless of any definition or what Scotland wants to do


----------



## ger147 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So still United Kingdom regardless of any definition or what Scotland wants to do
		
Click to expand...

Only Scotland and England were historically Kingdoms and that's where the term United Kingdom came from in the first place, so technically there would no longer be any kingdoms that were united.

However, IMO anyway, it's now just the name of the country currently made up of England, Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland and I see no reason why that would not continue to be the name of England, Wales and Northern Ireland if Scotland left.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So still United Kingdom regardless of any definition or what Scotland wants to do
		
Click to expand...

There are a minority of Scots who drink tenants and know everything you know. They will even tell you what their nation flag stands for if you ask them.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 13, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Only Scotland and England were historically Kingdoms and that's where the term United Kingdom came from in the first place, so technically there would no longer be any kingdoms that were united.

However, IMO anyway, it's now just the name of the country currently made up of England, Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland and I see no reason why that would not continue to be the name of England, Wales and Northern Ireland if Scotland left.
		
Click to expand...

Surely you are not forgetting Gruffydd ap Llewellyn the last King of Wales.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Only Scotland and England were historically Kingdoms and that's where the term United Kingdom came from in the first place, so technically there would no longer be any kingdoms that were united.

However, IMO anyway, it's now just the name of the country currently made up of England, Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland and I see no reason why that would not continue to be the name of England, Wales and Northern Ireland if Scotland left.
		
Click to expand...


Haven't Wales been a kingdom at one point with a King ?


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			:rofl:

So will many look to immigrate from Scotland into England if there is a Yes ?
		
Click to expand...

In the Interests of pedantry, one emigrates to another country Rather than immigrate to it


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 13, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			In the Interests of pedantry, one emigrates to another country Rather than immigrate to it 

Click to expand...

Meh ! :temper:


----------



## ger147 (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Haven't Wales been a kingdom at one point with a King ?
		
Click to expand...

Not officially, no.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Haven't Wales been a kingdom at one point with a King ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes but not for a long time, they were a Principality up to 1542 but were at that date integrated into the Kingdom of England.   Although referred to as a Principality this is not correct.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 13, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Yes but not for a long time, they were a Principality up to 1542 but were at that date integrated into the Kingdom of England.   Although referred to as a Principality this is not correct.
		
Click to expand...

As you correctly state, the UK was created by the union of just 2 kingdoms, England and Scotland. Wales was 100% part of England at the time and NI didn't exist. So if Scotland leaves, there would be no united kingdoms any more.

But as I said above, IMO I see no reason why the UK wouldn't continue to be the name of the rest of the countries if Scotland leave despite how the name originally came about.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 13, 2014)

ger147 said:



			As you correctly state, the UK was created by the union of just 2 kingdoms, England and Scotland. Wales was 100% part of England at the time and NI didn't exist. So if Scotland leaves, there would be no united kingdoms any more.

But as I said above, IMO I see no reason why the UK wouldn't continue to be the name of the rest of the countries if Scotland leave despite how the name originally came about.
		
Click to expand...

I don't see that as being strictly true, is it not The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?


----------



## ger147 (Feb 13, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			I don't see that as being strictly true, is it not The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?
		
Click to expand...

It is now yes, but it wasn't when first created, it was the United Kingdom of Great Britain, made up of the united kingdoms of England and Scotland.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 13, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Only Scotland and England were historically Kingdoms and that's where the term United Kingdom came from in the first place, so technically there would no longer be any kingdoms that were united.

However, IMO anyway, it's now just the name of the country currently made up of England, Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland and I see no reason why that would not continue to be the name of England, Wales and Northern Ireland if Scotland left.
		
Click to expand...

I think Lpp was really stating along the lines....

Is it a Kingdom; is it United!

Suddenly noticed that there's a couple of anagrams their too. Currently SWINE; possibly WINE! 



Old Skier said:



			There are a minority of Scots who drink tenants and know everything you know. They will even tell you what their nation flag stands for if you ask them.
		
Click to expand...

Reputedly plenty partake of a Wine Tonic produced nearer your neck of the woods!


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 13, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			In the Interests of pedantry, one emigrates to another country Rather than immigrate to it 

Click to expand...

Thank heaven! That's was bugging me.:rofl:


----------



## lex! (Feb 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			wot? You got as wee thing for Daphne Broon?
		
Click to expand...

There's something there, just don't ask me to put my finger on it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

lex! said:



			There's something there, just don't ask me to put my finger on it.
		
Click to expand...

Every time Daphne comes on the box my Mrs asks me if I fancy her


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 14, 2014)

lex! said:



			There's something there, just don't ask me to put my finger on it.
		
Click to expand...

Aye, but you'd prefer Maggie wouldn't you?


----------



## titleistho (Feb 14, 2014)

so I see a guy that wants scotland to be separate from the union then the first thing he wants after separation is to have a union again with the pound! the man is an idiot who believes his own fantasies, the hanging on fish is just as bad


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

titleistho said:



			so I see a guy that wants scotland to be separate from the union then the first thing he wants after separation is to have a union again with the pound! the man is an idiot who believes his own fantasies, the hanging on fish is just as bad
		
Click to expand...

Surely it is simply up to the Scottish electorate to decide whether or not the degree of independence that is being offered is what they want - or are are least content with in the short-medium term.  If they don't like the idea of being in a 'sterling-zone', and therefore dependent upon the rUK in that respect, then they will be more likely to vote NO.  

Who are we down here to scoff and say 'call that independence - that's not real independence - you don't want that'  They'll decide whether it is what they want or not - not us.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Who are we down here to scoff and say 'call that independence - that's not real independence - you don't want that'  They'll decide whether it is what they want or not - not us.
		
Click to expand...


We down here are the other parties involved. I don't think that you get to pick and choose. You are either with us, or not part of us.

You don't get to slag us off, claim you could do so much better, but then conveniently stick with the good bits that you like. This is something that will directly affect rUK, so we should get some say on this. Fully appreciate all of the parties agreeing and saying no currency union.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 14, 2014)

Are the 'we down here' people aware that they are being southernist to the rUK residents who are not down there.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Are the 'we down here' people aware that they are being southernist to the rUK residents who are not down there.
		
Click to expand...

How so?

England is under Scotland, therefore "down here" covers everything below Scotland, from Carlisle to Coleraine, to Cornwall.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			We down here are the other parties involved. I don't think that you get to pick and choose. You are either with us, or not part of us.

You don't get to slag us off, claim you could do so much better, but then conveniently stick with the good bits that you like. This is something that will directly affect rUK, so we should get some say on this. Fully appreciate all of the parties agreeing and saying no currency union.
		
Click to expand...

They won't actually be able to *choose *to stick with the good bits they like - they will choose the bits they would want to negotiate with rUK to have/share. The rUK then decides whether or not it suits rUK interests to participate/share.

The YES campaign is gambling on what they consider a near certainty that - whatever the Westminster parties say today (or yesterday) - if push came to shove and an iScotland came knocking on door of #11 Downing Street seeking a 'sterling-zone', then the rUK government would be pragmatic and say OK - purely in the interests of the rUK economy.  And that may even be in acceptance that it is not what the rUK would have wanted in an ideal world.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 14, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			How so?

England is under Scotland, therefore "down here" covers everything below Scotland, from Carlisle to Coleraine, to Cornwall.
		
Click to expand...

So the English and Irish folk who live north of Sandend are being sent to Coventry then.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So the English and Irish folk who live north of Sandend are being sent to Coventry then.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry no room in Coventry.

Wouldn't understand a word they said anyway.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

This thread has taken an ever so small sinister step over the last couple of pages, mostly between folk living in England discussing Scotland.interesting.


But over the last few days we've discovered the only thing the remaining parts of the united kindom/principality/province are willing to share with an independent Scotland is the debt, NOTHING more.I think that reflects quite badly on rukpp.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

When growing up I considered Southport as way down south (well try getting there from Glasgow before the A74 dual-carriageway and M6 were built) The real south of England was a strange and unknown land - that actually I knew or bothered very little about.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So the English and Irish folk who live north of Sandend are being sent to Coventry then.
		
Click to expand...

I'm confused?! My geography, admittedly, isn't best, but what parts of England/Wales/Northern Ireland are north of Sandend?

Bear in mind that for this, it is based on where you live, not where you consider yourself to be from. Isn't that right SILH


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This thread has taken an ever so small sinister step over the last couple of pages, mostly between folk living in England discussing Scotland.interesting.


But over the last few days we've discovered the only thing the remaining parts of the united kindom/principality/province are willing to share with an independent Scotland is the debt, NOTHING more.I think that reflects quite badly on rukpp.
		
Click to expand...

yes - noticed that as I count in that group - suddenly lots of opinions about what Scotland should be wanting and should and can't have and impact on us southerners.  ANd that is all a good thing I think.  And as I mentioned in a previous post - English/Welsh opinion that says basically an iScotland can sod off and sort themselves out - well will be interesting to see how that goes down with the Scottish electorate - and rUK would be willing to just let an iScotland crash and burn if it came to it. Hmmm.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I'm confused?! My geography, admittedly, isn't best, but what parts of England/Wales/Northern Ireland are north of Sandend?

Bear in mind that for this, it is based on where you live, not where you consider yourself to be from. Isn't that right SILH 

Click to expand...

Oh yes - I am down south - and so in the context of the debate I want to understand how *my *government in Westminster) will deal with an iScotland


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This thread has taken an ever so small sinister step over the last couple of pages, mostly between folk living in England discussing Scotland.interesting.
		
Click to expand...

I think your right and it's only going to get worse if as the nationalists and their republican friends realise the no vote is going to win. You only have to look on other forums covering the subject.

Mr Salmond and his crones have a lot to answer for. He's lit the blue touch paper knowing what will come next.

Time for the mods to bin the thread.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I think your right and it's only going to get worse if as the nationalists and their republican friends realise the no vote is going to win. You only have to look on other forums covering the subject.

Mr Salmond and his crones have a lot to answer for. He's lit the blue touch paper knowing what will come next.

Time for the mods to bin the thread.
		
Click to expand...

A guy in Scotland is to blame for the sinister ramblings of folk living in England.

Aye.Right.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			UK would be willing to just let an iScotland crash and burn if it came to it. Hmmm.
		
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought it was the odd Scot who was looking for a split from RUK.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

And so one one hand we have Cameron telling the English to tell the Scottish electorate how much we love them - and how much HE loves Scotland and the Scots.  And then a few days later we have Osborne et al telling the electorate that if you go you own way - then you are on your own.  We really loved you but if you vote YES you burn your bridges with us - and we will say begone and don't come running to us looking for help.  A sentiment I can start hearing reflected even on here.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A guy in Scotland is to blame for the sinister ramblings of folk living in England.

Aye.Right.
		
Click to expand...

:swing:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 14, 2014)

http://itouchmap.com/latlong.html



CheltenhamHacker said:



			I'm confused?! My geography, admittedly, isn't best, but what parts of England/Wales/Northern Ireland are north of Sandend?

Bear in mind that for this, it is based on where you live, not where you consider yourself to be from. Isn't that right SILH 

Click to expand...

There you go.
I think Edinburgh is also further west than Bristol [in the west country]


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 14, 2014)

SLH the only thing I hear is that we do love you (less your pipes) but if you want Independence so be it. We just don't understand why you only want bits of independence and not the full blown deal.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			SLH the only thing I hear is that we do love you (less your pipes) but if you want Independence so be it. We just don't understand why you only want bits of independence and not the full blown deal.
		
Click to expand...

We don't have to understand what they want.  If what they think they are being offered doesn't match what they want for an iScotland then they will be more inclined to say NO.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			SLH the only thing I hear is that we do love you (less your pipes) but if you want Independence so be it. We just don't understand why you only want bits of independence and not the full blown deal.
		
Click to expand...

So a fully indy Scotland gets no Â£,embassies,no assets, no liabilities?


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			We don't have to understand what they want.  If what they think they are being offered doesn't match what they want for an iScotland then they will be more inclined to say NO.
		
Click to expand...

I get it. Scots want independence but are unsure about which bits of being independent they want.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And so one one hand we have Cameron telling the English to tell the Scottish electorate how much we love them - and how much HE loves Scotland and the Scots.  And then a few days later we have Osborne et al telling the electorate that if you go you own way - then you are on your own.  We really loved you but if you vote YES you burn your bridges with us - and we will say begone and don't come running to us looking for help.  A sentiment I can start hearing reflected even on here.
		
Click to expand...

Do you write tabloid headlines by ant chance!!??

What a completely OTT view. I guess you need your daily outrage......

In the event of a Yes vote the Westminster govt remit is to.look after the interests of those they govern as a first priority. All they are saying is they don't feel a currency union (and an implicit guarantee of sorts) forms part of that.

Your post says "if you go your own way - then you are on your own" makes me chuckle. Is that not the point and definition of Independence!!!???


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A guy in Scotland is to blame for the sinister ramblings of folk living in England.

Aye.Right.
		
Click to expand...

To be honest, Adi, I've never been a Salmond fan but with his latest "bullying" rant I feel he's gone too far. It's not bullying to say "no". Time for the SNP to take that on the chin and tell us what their proposed alternative is.

I do believe he is deliberately trying to stoke up a conflict in the hope it'll drive more pro-union Scots into the "yes" camp through sheer bloody-mindedness (a national trait, lets face it).


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I get it. Scots want independence but are unsure about which bits of being independent they want.
		
Click to expand...

Come the vote I hope they will have an idea of what is being offered - and so for instance as of today the YES campaign say that that will include Scotland using Sterling as currency as part of a 'Sterling Zone' with rUK.  Now if the Scottish electorate don't like that idea and that it's not independent enough - they will be more inclined to vote NO.  And the same will apply for a number of other things to be 'shared' with rUK and Europe.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I do believe he is deliberately trying to stoke up a conflict in the hope it'll drive more pro-union Scots into the "yes" camp through sheer bloody-mindedness (a national trait, lets face it).
		
Click to expand...

And I think that the more widespread south of the border becomes the view that an iScotland could crash and burn as far they could care - that too could have the same result.

The bullying phrasing is not quite right.  But I think that it is the case that for the Westminster parties to say - No Never on currency union is disingenous because there is no such as thing as 'never' in this.  I think it was a mistake on their part to be so absolute.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So a fully indy Scotland gets no Â£,embassies,no assets, no liabilities?
		
Click to expand...

As I see it iscot becames a fully fledged independent country that wants to join the EU without abiding by the current rules for new joiners so wants to latch on to the UK economy. At what point does iscot then turn around because things arnt looking to good down south and run away from the Â£.

Why would you want your own embassies, most minor countries either share or just have consulates.

As to military assets, not sure why you want them as you have deserted the Scotish regiments not allowing them any say in their future so have nobody able to use those assets.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 14, 2014)

Anyone watch Question Time last night.
Very interesting to hear the criticism of the Scunthorpe folk to The Chancellors statement re Â£
I did not expect that


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			To be honest, Adi, I've never been a Salmond fan but with his latest "bullying" rant I feel he's gone too far. It's not bullying to say "no". Time for the SNP to take that on the chin and tell us what their proposed alternative is.

I do believe he is deliberately trying to stoke up a conflict in the hope it'll drive more pro-union Scots into the "yes" camp through sheer bloody-mindedness (a national trait, lets face it).
		
Click to expand...

I'm no fan of Salmond or The SNP...quite like Sturgeon if truth be told.

Maybe I'm making an assumption here, but the alternative is to use the Â£ anyway.It's perfectly legal to do so.And I think the reason he's gone negative this past couple of days is because he's being told, no currency union, no share in our Â£, but you'll be obliged to take your share of the debt.Now last month the treasury confirmed that all debt post yes will be guarantee by them, pretty much saying Scotland doesn't have to take is %, then yesterday we had the treasury setting out the pathway to currency union...the Gideon speech yesterday was a reaction to that pathway.So the treasury an The BoE can both see a pathway to currency union, and yet the politicians on the NO side refuse to agree to use it.Salmond was well within his rights to call their bluff and call that bullying.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			As I see it iscot becames a fully fledged independent country that wants to join the EU without abiding by the current rules for new joiners so wants to latch on to the UK economy. At what point does iscot then turn around because things arnt looking to good down south and run away from the Â£.

Why would you want your own embassies, most minor countries either share or just have consulates.

As to military assets, not sure why you want them as you have deserted the Scotish regiments not allowing them any say in their future so have nobody able to use those assets.
		
Click to expand...

I think that is a reply saying no asset/no liabilities.


----------



## lex! (Feb 14, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			To be honest, Adi, I've never been a Salmond fan but with his latest "bullying" rant I feel he's gone too far. It's not bullying to say "no". Time for the SNP to take that on the chin and tell us what their proposed alternative is.

I do believe he is deliberately trying to stoke up a conflict in the hope it'll drive more pro-union Scots into the "yes" camp through sheer bloody-mindedness (a national trait, lets face it).
		
Click to expand...

Yes, I think that you are spot on with these comments. I also think that the worry, on both sides of the border, is that an independant Salmond would unleash a social policy spending spree unlike any other ever seen, without any idea how to pay for it other than borrowed Â£Â£ in the very short term.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Do you write tabloid headlines by ant chance!!??

What a completely OTT view. I guess you need your daily outrage......
		
Click to expand...

Is it not how some of the Scottish electorate might hear it.  And there are some here who would it seems be content to let an iScotland crash and burn if it came to it.  Well so be it.


----------



## Tommo21 (Feb 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I think it was a mistake on their part to be so absolute.
		
Click to expand...

Ed Balls and the labour party are crapping themselves............after all, 41 MPs here in scotland are labour.Thats 41 from 59 total. 

The chances of the labour party ever being in power again down south would be real slim if scotland went indipendant.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

lex! said:



			Yes, I think that you are spot on with these comments. I also think that the worry, on both sides of the border, is that an independant Salmond would unleash a social policy spending spree unlike any other ever seen, without any idea how to pay for it other than borrowed Â£Â£ in the very short term.
		
Click to expand...

If you genuinely think this to be accurate then there is no hope for you.


----------



## lex! (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If you genuinely think this to be accurate then there is no hope for you.
		
Click to expand...

Er....that's why he's been told he can't have the Â£, and why the NO vote rides high in the opinion polls. There's always hope for me, I hope the wind and rain stops soon so that I can hit a bucket of balls on the way home, and I hope that there's steak for ma tea.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

lex! said:



			Er....that's why he's been told he can't have the Â£, and why the NO vote rides high in the opinion polls.
		
Click to expand...

47% Yes
40% No
13% dunno

and its getting closer all the time.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 14, 2014)

Where is that poll from ?


----------



## bluewolf (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			47% Yes
40% No
13% dunno

and its getting closer all the time.
		
Click to expand...

Is that right? The YES vote is winning? I thought it was the other way..


----------



## guest100718 (Feb 14, 2014)

Tommo21 said:



			Ed Balls and the labour party are crapping themselves............after all, 41 MPs here in scotland are labour.Thats 41 from 59 total. 

The chances of the labour party ever being in power again down south would be real slim if scotland went indipendant.
		
Click to expand...

Not really, labour would just have to be more targeted in thier policies.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Is that right? The YES vote is winning? I thought it was the other way..
		
Click to expand...

oops, it is the other way round, sorry!


----------



## bluewolf (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			oops, it is the other way round, sorry!
		
Click to expand...

Worried me for a minute.. Most of us down here don't want you to go..:thup:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 14, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Worried me for a minute.. Most of us down here don't want you to go..:thup:
		
Click to expand...


They seem be trying to change that thinking though


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Worried me for a minute.. Most of us down here don't want you to go..:thup:
		
Click to expand...

We've already said â€˜Goodbyeâ€™.
Since you've got to go
Oh you had better go now.
Go now. Go now. Go now
Before you see me cry.
I don't want you to tell me
Just what you intend to do now.
'Cause how many times do I have to tell you
Darling, darling,
I'm still in love
With you now


----------



## bluewolf (Feb 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			We've already said â€˜Goodbyeâ€™.
Since you've got to go
Oh you had better go now.
Go now. Go now. Go now
Before you see me cry.
I don't want you to tell me
Just what you intend to do now.
'Cause how many times do I have to tell you
Darling, darling,
I'm still in love
With you now
		
Click to expand...

Stop quoting The Moody Blues at me.....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Stop quoting The Moody Blues at me.....

Click to expand...

It's rubbish outside and course is going to be closed again this weekend - I'm moody - I'm blue.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm no fan of Salmond or The SNP...quite like Sturgeon if truth be told.

Maybe I'm making an assumption here, but the alternative is to use the Â£ anyway.It's perfectly legal to do so.And I think the reason he's gone negative this past couple of days is because he's being told, no currency union, no share in our Â£, but you'll be obliged to take your share of the debt.Now last month the treasury confirmed that all debt post yes will be guarantee by them, pretty much saying Scotland doesn't have to take is %, then yesterday we had the treasury setting out the pathway to currency union...the Gideon speech yesterday was a reaction to that pathway.So the treasury an The BoE can both see a pathway to currency union, and yet the politicians on the NO side refuse to agree to use it.Salmond was well within his rights to call their bluff and call that bullying.
		
Click to expand...

George Osborne's speech was based upon a report and recommendations prepared by the leading Civil Servant at the Treasury so it is rather disingenuous of the Yes campaign to suggest that it is the politicians rather than the Treasury that is rejecting currency union.

Equally the Governor of the BoE did not exactly seem overjoyed by the idea when he recently spoke in Edinburgh.

It is increasingly clear that the Yes campaign does not have a Plan B in the event of being denied currency union, hence the insistence that the UK Government does not really mean it when it says no.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

You know who's to blame for all of this independence enthusiasm


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 14, 2014)

Is that a young Margaret Thatcher?


----------



## Imurg (Feb 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The YES campaign is gambling on what they consider a near certainty that - whatever the Westminster parties say today (or yesterday) - if push came to shove and an iScotland came knocking on door of #11 Downing Street seeking a 'sterling-zone', then the rUK government would be pragmatic and say OK - purely in the interests of the rUK economy.  And that may even be in acceptance that it is not what the rUK would have wanted in an ideal world.
		
Click to expand...

Even the best Gamblers get it wrong......



SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Come the vote I hope they will have an idea of what is being offered .
		
Click to expand...

Come the vote I would hope they know EXACTLY what they are being offered....astonishing to think otherwise.

So Westminster, it seems, is unanimous in their view that the Â£ stays as it is and the Scots have to find something else - so what is Salmond's Plan B..? or is he going to "Gamble"..?
That in itself would be enough for me....


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

scotland can use the Â£ whether england likes it or not


----------



## bluewolf (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



 england 

Click to expand...

I'll assume you mean rUK, to use the current terminology..... "Pedantic mode off"


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



scotland can use the Â£ whether england likes it or not

Click to expand...

Yes but would any independent nation wish to have a currency over which it had no control or say.

Your shouting suggests that those in favour of independence have not thought it through but inhabit a dreamworld where everything is free and nobody need worry about costs and consequences because if it all goes wrong you can ask those nasty people in England to put it right.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 14, 2014)

Up to a few years ago the stroppy teenager used to pack their bags shout "I'm off", and go.  Today's stroppy teenager shouts "I'm off" and takes half the house with them and expects their parents to continue to supply the finances for their little venture.

Seems like it's moved up a tier.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 14, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Up to a few years ago the stroppy teenager used to pack their bags shout "I'm off", and go.  Today's stroppy teenager shouts "I'm off" and takes half the house with them and expects their parents to continue to supply the finances for their little venture.

Seems like it's moved up a tier.
		
Click to expand...

:clap::rofl:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Is that a young Margaret Thatcher?
		
Click to expand...

You know quite well who it is...and I'm guessing that Grantham Lincs. doesn't have too much housing of the sort in the background.  I'm guessing that some older non-Scots will know or be able to guess who this is (click on image to get first name of the glamorous blonde )


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You know quite well who it is...and I'm guessing that Grantham Lincs. doesn't have too much housing of the sort in the background.  I'm guessing that some older non-Scots will know or be able to guess who this is (click on image to get first name of the glamorous blonde )
		
Click to expand...

Margo from The Good Life then.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Yes but would any independent nation wish to have a currency over which it had no control or say.

Your shouting suggests that those in favour of independence have not thought it through but inhabit a dreamworld where everything is free and nobody need worry about costs and consequences because if it all goes wrong you can ask those nasty people in England to put it right.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for talking down to me, your fitting in nicely with the stereotype we're experiencing up here.

Nothing in life is free, some things you pay for that you neither require or use.Look out for The Adam Smith institute weighing in with some interesting views over the next few days.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			we're experiencing up here.
		
Click to expand...

Ahem. DfT doesn't like people using "up here" or "down here".  

Also, it's a bit rich to be referring to "talking down to me", when you've pretty much shouted all over a thread.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Ahem. DfT doesn't like people using "up here" or "down here".  

Also, it's a bit rich to be referring to "talking down to me", when you've pretty much shouted all over a thread.
		
Click to expand...

True, so I apologise.I get fed up with misinformation,assumption and arrogance, things, as a Nationalist ( but not SNP supporter) who spends alot of time in England I experience quite often.I'll debate this with anyone who is interested, I'm really passionate about it and this year is mega, but folk claiming Scots expect everything free and we'll run up masses of debt are ignorant.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Thanks for talking down to me, your fitting in nicely with the stereotype we're experiencing up here.

Nothing in life is free, some things you pay for that you neither require or use.Look out for The Adam Smith institute weighing in with some interesting views over the next few days.
		
Click to expand...

And you are neatly fitting the image of the chippy Scot.

I fail to see where  I have talked down to you. Merely stated that I cannot see what the Yes camp are offering the Scottish people as an alternative to currency union. It is all very well saying that ultimately Westminster will agree to this but surely the electorate would like to be informed what Mr Salmond proposes if this does not happen.

Ultimately it is your choice but I find it hard to accept that a truly independent Scotland would be prepared to forego fiscal control and all that it entails.

I don't do patronising!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 14, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Ultimately it is your choice but I find it hard to accept that a truly independent Scotland would be prepared to forego fiscal control and all that it entails.
		
Click to expand...

One last time.We could use the Â£, not enter a currency union and have full fiscal control over taxation etc.Being IN a currency union means some of that would have to be ceded, no currency union but using the Â£ is different.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			One last time.We could use the Â£, not enter a currency union and have full fiscal control over taxation etc.Being IN a currency union means some of that would have to be ceded, no currency union but using the Â£ is different.
		
Click to expand...

But with no control over interest or exchange rates and no bank of last resort for your financial institutions.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 14, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			I don't do patronising!
		
Click to expand...

Aye right!!


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Aye right!!
		
Click to expand...

Keep "chipping" away.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 14, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Ahem. DfT doesn't like people using "up here" or "down here".  

Also, it's a bit rich to be referring to "talking down to me", when you've pretty much shouted all over a thread.
		
Click to expand...

Slightly better than being called 'them' though!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 14, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Keep "chipping" away.
		
Click to expand...

FGS I'm agreeing with you!


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			FGS I'm agreeing with you!
		
Click to expand...

My apologies. Subtlety and grace are clearly not my strong suits. Not very good at tact and diplomacy either. Good job I didn't seek a career in the Foreign Office.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 16, 2014)

So it looks like EU membership is not an option.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 16, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			So it looks like EU membership is not an option.
		
Click to expand...

Fat Eck has been told this previously, on the first occasion he briefly pulled his head from the sand to state 'no, it will be fine, we can just join straight away'.  The man is an utter idiot.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 16, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			So it looks like EU membership is not an option.
		
Click to expand...

Er. That's debatable. But I wouldn't expect that it wouldn't be immediate. And would be 'difficult if not impossibe'

But it certainly focuses the SNP's rejection of the ERM/Euro which, I believe, wouldn't help their case. I don't believe the argument that 'Scotland is already a member' holds water either, but that's one for the politicians/diplomats!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 16, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			So it looks like EU membership is not an option.
		
Click to expand...

That actually isn't what Barroso said...'difficult' is not the same as 'not an option'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scotland/

Also interesting opinion piece in yesterday's Daily Telegraph by an economics commentator who would prefer Scotland to remain in the Union.  His view was that in the event of a YES vote there is no realistic alternative to a 'sterling-zone' and that the rUK would accommodate Scotland in one despite there being some risks and negatives for the rUK. Simply that the risks and issues associated with any alternative were too great for the rUK.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 16, 2014)

No one seems to be talking about the risks to the dUK, so perhaps Lord Soapy is not the only guy with his head in the sand.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			No one seems to be talking about the risks to the dUK, so perhaps Lord Soapy is not the only guy with his head in the sand.
		
Click to expand...

the dUK - devolved UK?

And you might say that in the event of an independent Scotland the rUK is not the same country as the one that joined the EU.  Only jesting - except perhaps rUK getting told that we must apply to join the EU would suit the Cameroonians down to the ground - they wouldn't have to bother about holding the IN/OUT EU referendum in 2017 - as the would already be out.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 16, 2014)

Elmer Fudd should be polite to the Wabbit as it would have the power of veto.

View attachment 9149


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			the dUK - devolved UK?
		
Click to expand...

Close...diminished!
[In deference to those on here who did not like rUK.]


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 16, 2014)

I was amused by the Scottish politician saying it was preposterous from the European Chairman ( whatever he is ) 

Good to see these Scottish politicians saying how it is going to be - arrogance beyond belief - since when did these a Scottish politicians decide what Europe or the Bank of England are going to do.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Close...diminished!
[In deference to those on here who did not like rUK.]
		
Click to expand...

Some might choose eUK - enhanced!

A Glossary/Cast List might be handy. Fat Eck I've worked out - Leader of the Fish Party. But please enlighten me as to who Lord Soapy is?



Liverpoolphil said:



			I was amused by the Scottish politician saying it was preposterous from the European Chairman ( whatever he is ) 

Good to see these Scottish politicians saying how it is going to be - arrogance beyond belief - since when did these a Scottish politicians decide what Europe or the Bank of England are going to do.
		
Click to expand...

Yes. that amused me too! President btw.

John Swinney's looking to be Scotland's Ambassador to EU with comments like that! Still, it won't be the same guy he has to deal with by the time any negotiation comes around - assuming the vote is a 'Yes'


----------



## drawboy (Feb 16, 2014)

Get the borders shut, round em all up and send 'em home where they want to be roamin the glomin.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 16, 2014)

Lord Soapy is an Oor Willie cartoon character with more than a passing likeness to Eck
Daphne and Horace are characters from The Broons with a likeness to Sturgeon and Swinney.

Cameroonian is our leader who has just recently come out as a Great Scot.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Cameroonian is our leader who has just recently come out as a Great Scot.
		
Click to expand...

...and I wouldn't want to suggest any associations with the great Scottish regiment - the Cameronians (Scottish Rifles).

Interesting perhaps that I suspect most here don't realise how iconic the young Margo is to Scot Nats - though she has fairly long since eschewed the SNP camp.  I imagine interesting discussions with Mr Sillars.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 17, 2014)

Just had a thought ...Cameroonians conversion makes the last three UK PM's Scottish.
Perhaps this nationalist thing is just a bit of tosh and the Scots should stay as they are and continue to lead the UK.
Michael Gove the next perhaps?  [provided he can backfoot the U Kippers]


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 17, 2014)

So, just to recap,  Scottish citizens will be removed from Europe,refused access to their currency,vetoed from joining NATO,not have sufficient defence forces to protect our borders from rampaging terror cells,have the economic output of Albania,have sections of the upper clyde partitioned and have border controls in place between Scotland & England.

We've had the three main parties @ Westminster all come out in a united front against self determination...never happened in peace time before and we've seen the foreign office use diplomatic channels asking Spain and Russia to become involved on behalf of BT.

And all while this is happening polls show YES gaining momentum and closing the gap, and all the while the negative aspects of independence are continually spewed by the MSM,politicians and the political succulent lamb brigade.Are they learning nothing?

Anyone who sees anything but a YES victory now is seriously deluded.


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 17, 2014)

Out of the Union...
Out of the EU...
No currency union...
Sounds like a good basis for a truly independent self determining nation...

May I come and join you?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 17, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Out of the Union...
Out of the EU...
No currency union...
Sounds like a good basis for a truly independent self determining nation...

May I come and join you?
		
Click to expand...

I had that thought the other day, there may be a deluge of U Kippers seeking political asylum in Scotland.
Better set up the border controls ASAP.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So, just to recap,  Scottish citizens will be removed from Europe,refused access to their currency,vetoed from joining NATO,not have sufficient defence forces to protect our borders from rampaging terror cells,have the economic output of Albania,have sections of the upper clyde partitioned and have border controls in place between Scotland & England.

We've had the three main parties @ Westminster all come out in a united front against self determination...never happened in peace time before and we've seen the foreign office use diplomatic channels asking Spain and Russia to become involved on behalf of BT.

And all while this is happening polls show YES gaining momentum and closing the gap, and all the while the negative aspects of independence are continually spewed by the MSM,politicians and the political succulent lamb brigade.Are they learning nothing?

Anyone who sees anything but a YES victory now is seriously deluded.
		
Click to expand...

When and by whom was a veto against NATO membership mentioned?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 17, 2014)

@Adi - whilst you may be accused of over-egging the situation - just taking the Barroso and Osborne statements together and believing both, highlights the preposterousness of it all.  Let us imagine that Barroso is correct and Scotland cannot get into the EU (and note that his gloom and doom scenario for membership wasn't given any timescales - he was saying Scotland would struggle to get into the EU - EVER).  Scotland could therefore also clearly not use the Euro as currency.  In that scenario I struggle to imagine that the rUK would actually let Scotland find it's own way outside of the EU and outside of a 'Sterling-Zone' - and sink or swim -  when sink would have a massive negative impact on the rUK economy?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 17, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			When and by whom was a veto against NATO membership mentioned?
		
Click to expand...

http://archive.is/l5TMI

and re-iterated just last week Labour grandee and the worlds bitterest man, Dr Michael Kelly


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://archive.is/l5TMI

and re-iterated just last week Labour grandee and the worlds bitterest man, Dr Michael Kelly
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for that mate, hadn't heard or seen that


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 17, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Thanks for that mate, hadn't heard or seen that
		
Click to expand...

But it does not say they cannot be members of NATO, just if they weaken NATOs ability to use bases in Scotland then this coud be an option. Or is it so early I missed a bit.

Not raining so off to play a few holes


----------



## ger147 (Feb 17, 2014)

I simply cannot believe that if Scotland votes Yes, we won't be allowed into the Eurovision Song Contest. That really is the last straw!!!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 17, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I simply cannot believe that if Scotland votes Yes, we won't be allowed into the Eurovision Song Contest. That really is the last straw!!!
		
Click to expand...

Scotland would be welcomed with open arms - just promise to send along a current day Andy Stewart singing '_Donald Where's Your Troosers'_ and wearing a kilt - you would be in.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 17, 2014)

And then there's sport - no more Champions League football at Celtic Park and Davie Moyes would need to apply for a work permit. On current form I can see that application being rejected.


----------



## Aztecs27 (Feb 17, 2014)

http://newsthump.com/2014/02/17/ale...ery-right-to-use-gym-hes-no-longer-member-of/


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 17, 2014)

I see Cleggy is playing footsy with the socialists now. What a tart.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 17, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I see Cleggy is playing footsy with the socialists now. What a tart.
		
Click to expand...

Never going to get in. Surprised he hasn't thrown his hat on with Salmond to be honest.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 17, 2014)

The EU would welcome Scotland with open arms... all that oil revenue to prop up their failing banks.

Could they keep the pound? They can call it what they want. Egypt kept the pound... it just wouldn't have the backing of the BoE. But do they need that backing, with all the oil revenue?

Does the Rest of the UK need the oil revenue that much? England has its own oil field right in the middle of London,the finacial sector. Its the financial sector that provides almost as much revenue as the oil, and unlike the oil field it isn't likely to run out all that soon.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 17, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			The EU would welcome Scotland with open arms... all that oil revenue to prop up their failing banks.

Could they keep the pound? They can call it what they want. Egypt kept the pound... it just wouldn't have the backing of the BoE. But do they need that backing, with all the oil revenue?

Does the Rest of the UK need the oil revenue that much? England has its own oil field right in the middle of London,the finacial sector. Its the financial sector that provides almost as much revenue as the oil, and unlike the oil field it isn't likely to run out all that soon.
		
Click to expand...

Who will be the lender of last resort to them though?  If Scotland created their own money supply then who would be confident that it would retain its value in the future?   If the Scottish Money did not hold such confidence then it would be subject to high inflation.

If I was Scottish I would need a clear understanding on these matters before I could start to make a decision on Independance.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 17, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Who will be the lender of last resort to them though?  If Scotland created their own money supply then who would be confident that it would retain its value in the future?   If the Scottish Money did not hold such confidence then it would be subject to high inflation.

If I was Scottish I would need a clear understanding on these matters before I could start to make a decision on Independance.
		
Click to expand...

Who is the lender of last resort to 'the UK' at the moment and who would be for the rUK post a YES vote?  Because I don't really know.  Is is the European Central Bank; is it the IMF or is it the Bank of England?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 17, 2014)

A scenario that no one seems to have thought about.
Scotland vote no because of threats to Pound, Europe, Nato, Eurovision, Champions League etc etc.
Next UK election Scotland votes tactically and returns 45 SNP UKMP's
Hung parliament. Anarchy in the UK


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 17, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Who is the lender of last resort to 'the UK' at the moment and who would be for the rUK post a YES vote?  Because I don't really know.  Is is the European Central Bank; is it the IMF or is it the Bank of England?
		
Click to expand...

The Bank of England is and would be the Lender of Last resort to the Uk (r)


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 17, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			A scenario that no one seems to have thought about.
Scotland vote no because of threats to Pound, Europe, Nato, Eurovision, Champions League etc etc.
Next UK election Scotland votes tactically and returns 45 SNP UKMP's
Hung parliament. Anarchy in the UK
		
Click to expand...

Probably a Labour/SNP Parliament.


----------



## Val (Feb 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So, just to recap,  Scottish citizens will be removed from Europe,refused access to their currency,vetoed from joining NATO,not have sufficient defence forces to protect our borders from rampaging terror cells,have the economic output of Albania,have sections of the upper clyde partitioned and have border controls in place between Scotland & England..
		
Click to expand...

Not strictly true as a Scottish nation has never had this in the first place, however the UK has this of which Scotland are part of.

Making it easy, it's a bit like renting a fully furnished house and moving out and complaining when the landlord doesn't let you take the kettle, furniture and front door.


----------



## Val (Feb 17, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			A scenario that no one seems to have thought about.
Scotland vote no because of threats to Pound, Europe, Nato, Eurovision, Champions League etc etc.
Next UK election Scotland votes tactically and returns 45 SNP UKMP's
Hung parliament. Anarchy in the UK
		
Click to expand...

It would make an interesting movie but thats about it


----------



## Val (Feb 17, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Could they keep the pound? They can call it what they want.
		
Click to expand...


They'll probably called it Salmonds, with 10 Sturgeons to Salmond and 100 Swinneys to the Salmond


----------



## ger147 (Feb 17, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Not strictly true as a Scottish nation has never had this in the first place, however the UK has this of which Scotland are part of.

Making it easy, it's a bit like renting a fully furnished house and moving out and complaining when the landlord doesn't let you take the kettle, furniture and front door.
		
Click to expand...

Scotland and England don't have a tenant landlord relationship. A marriage would be more accurate and in the case of a divorce, assets are split...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 17, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Probably a Labour/SNP Parliament.
		
Click to expand...

AH but the SNP would remain independent and only back the more extreme measures proposed by the other parties.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 17, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Who will be the lender of last resort to them though?  If Scotland created their own money supply then who would be confident that it would retain its value in the future?   If the Scottish Money did not hold such confidence then it would be subject to high inflation.

If I was Scottish I would need a clear understanding on these matters before I could start to make a decision on Independance.
		
Click to expand...

The theory goes that any bank wishing to print their own Â£ (BoE/RBS/BoS/Clydesdale) need to deposit a Â£ for every Â£ they want to circulate.I read somewhere last week that there is something like Â£6 Billion worth of Scottish notes in circulation, so if these no longer become legal tender after any refusal to agree a currency union and the BoE refuse to 'stand behind' the 'Scottish banks', they'd need to hand back the money on deposit.Not a huge amount in the grand scheme of things, but significant enough.

I then wondered about BoE notes, and whether they also deposit Â£/Â£ with themselves?


I think I know the answer to this, but what do folk think about other UK assets, say the gold/silver reserves or RBS public ownership....would any post YES Scotland be entitled to a share?

And what do folk think about Baroso claiming it would be nearly 'impossible' for Scotland to join The EU.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 17, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Scotland and England don't have a tenant landlord relationship. A marriage would be more accurate and in the case of a divorce, assets are split...
		
Click to expand...

And the Bank of England is a shared asset just as the UK national debt is a shared debt (i.e. the BoE is not England's it belongs to the UK as the debt does).  So if Scotland go they should take their share of the debt with them - as well as their part of the BoE.  And if it is better for the BoE to not be split up then does an iScotland not have a share in the BoE and a say in what it does in the future.  So in the way that in a divorce the family home may stay with the wife as that is the sensible, practical and pragmatic thing - the husband may well retain a financial interest in the home and a say in what happens to it in the future.

And so as the house remains the husbands last resort source of finance or financial collateral, then so the BoE would remain Scotland's lender of last resort?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 17, 2014)

And what do folk in favour of The Union think about things like The BBC (Scotland could theoretically get it for nothing) Faslane/Nuclear submarines,RBS ownership,the redrawing of the maritime border at Berwick on Tweed if Scotland votes YES?

Do folk think that the relationship between Scotland/England would be altered dramatically for better or worse?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Do folk think that the relationship between Scotland/England would be altered dramatically for better or worse?
		
Click to expand...

As a 'southerner' I think the relationship would be worse in the short term but would improve fairly quickly.  We wouldn't have to put up with the Scots whinging about everything, blaming half their ills on unrepresentative government in Westminster; Scots wouldn't need to whinge on about the South-East of England, and the bleedin rapacious and greedy bankers in the City of Lond - and the house prices that enable English to buy holiday homes all over Scotland (but we still would  )  And I wouldn't have to listen to the uninformed and pretty ignorant twaddle about England and the English that I hear a lot of the time from Scots back home.

See - such benefits.  Come on Scotland - please say YES just so you'll all have to shut up and gie us peace down here.  I am quite serious. 

...see what living in south of England for 30 yrs does for you - a fresh perspective on life and Scotland ... oh yes!


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			And what do folk in favour of The Union think about things like The BBC (Scotland could theoretically get it for nothing) Faslane/Nuclear submarines,RBS ownership,the redrawing of the maritime border at Berwick on Tweed if Scotland votes YES?

Do folk think that the relationship between Scotland/England would be altered dramatically for better or worse?
		
Click to expand...


BBC - you can have, definitely. There's enough on the Sky channels to keep me occupied.
Nuclear subs - you can have. They're a cost to the tax payer, and generate zip for the economy.
RBS - currently owned by ALL the taxpayers. You can have your share based on the number of tax payers.
Maritme borders - as per how pretty much every other civilised country's maritime borders are recognised.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 17, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			BBC - you can have, definitely. There's enough on the Sky channels to keep me occupied.
Nuclear subs - you can have. They're a cost to the tax payer, and generate zip for the economy.
RBS - currently owned by ALL the taxpayers. You can have your share based on the number of tax payers.
Maritme borders - as per how pretty much every other civilised country's maritime borders are recognised.
		
Click to expand...

BBC - point is folk in Scotland could receive it for nothing by not paying a licence fee.  So we down here would have to pay the shortfall. 

Subs - they'll be towed down here and parked off Portsmouth - Scotland doesn't want them.

RBS - share and share alike - see also BoE and national debt

Nobody knows where the maritime border is in any case.  Scotland will just have boats patrolling to keep out economic migrants - or would that be to keep Scots in - dunno.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 17, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			BBC - point is folk in Scotland could receive it for nothing by not paying a licence fee.  So we down here would have to pay the shortfall. 
.
		
Click to expand...

Eire get the BBC for nowt, as do the (northern) French.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 17, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Eire get the BBC for nowt, as do the (northern) French.
		
Click to expand...

No matter - Scots will get their very, very own BBC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st8uIAAJ368

...and we can all learn the lingo so that we can converse with Glaswegians when on holiday and up for hogmanay

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGQItvUBhG4

Lesson 1 - Do you have a problem mother dear? - Whissamarramurra?


----------



## ger147 (Feb 17, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			As a 'southerner' I think the relationship would be worse in the short term but would improve fairly quickly.  We wouldn't have to put up with the Scots whinging about everything, blaming half their ills on unrepresentative government in Westminster; Scots wouldn't need to whinge on about the South-East of England, and the bleedin rapacious and greedy bankers in the City of Lond - and the house prices that enable English to buy holiday homes all over Scotland (but we still would  )  And I wouldn't have to listen to the uninformed and pretty ignorant twaddle about England and the English that I hear a lot of the time from Scots back home.

See - such benefits.  Come on Scotland - please say YES just so you'll all have to shut up and gie us peace down here.  I am quite serious. 

...see what living in south of England for 30 yrs does for you - a fresh perspective on life and Scotland ... oh yes!
		
Click to expand...

And you've just committed the cardinal sin for a Scot living in England i.e. referring to the English as "we". Go join Hansen on the naughty step.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 17, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Maritme borders - as per how pretty much every other civilised country's maritime borders are recognised.
		
Click to expand...


Give that man a coconut...you might be interested to read this>

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/01/scotlandengland-maritime-boundaries/


----------



## JCW (Feb 17, 2014)

Alex Salmon wants it , Question is does he want it for himself and is a power thing and to improve his own career , do the Scottish people want it and do they FULLY understand what they are going to vote for and how it will change their lives , will it improve it  or will it be the same , it could even get really bad . better the devil you know they say .......................EYG


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 17, 2014)

http://www.channel4.com/news/scotland-independence-alex-salmond-sterling-pound-europe


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 17, 2014)

So the Scottish minister is resorting to jibes about government ministers 

All going to get personal very soon 

Going to turn into an us and them campaign and get very messy and childish

Guess the days of the UK working together as a wonderful nation are over.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.channel4.com/news/scotland-independence-alex-salmond-sterling-pound-europe

Click to expand...

Excellent speech.

But the rhetoric to action ratio is a bit high still!l


----------



## Val (Feb 17, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Scotland and England don't have a tenant landlord relationship. A marriage would be more accurate and in the case of a divorce, assets are split...
		
Click to expand...

Fair point, but it is fair to say in a split marriage only 1 party can keep the telly


----------



## Val (Feb 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			And what do folk in favour of The Union think about things like The BBC (Scotland could theoretically get it for nothing) Faslane/Nuclear submarines,RBS ownership,the redrawing of the maritime border at Berwick on Tweed if Scotland votes YES?

Do folk think that the relationship between Scotland/England would be altered dramatically for better or worse?
		
Click to expand...

In the event of a No vote why should it change? If the people of Scotland vote no then it should be sending the message out saying we like what we have


----------



## ger147 (Feb 17, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Fair point, but it is fair to say in a split marriage only 1 party can keep the telly 

Click to expand...

Old Chic Murray joke:

"When the wife and I got divorced, we split the house 50/50. I got the outside."


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 17, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And the Bank of England is a shared asset just as the UK national debt is a shared debt (i.e. the BoE is not England's it belongs to the UK as the debt does).  So if Scotland go they should take their share of the debt with them - as well as their part of the BoE.  And if it is better for the BoE to not be split up then does an iScotland not have a share in the BoE and a say in what it does in the future.  So in the way that in a divorce the family home may stay with the wife as that is the sensible, practical and pragmatic thing - the husband may well retain a financial interest in the home and a say in what happens to it in the future.

And so as the house remains the husbands last resort source of finance or financial collateral, then so the BoE would remain Scotland's lender of last resort?
		
Click to expand...

So the rUK should also get their share of NS Oil revenues?


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 17, 2014)

Valentino said:



			In the event of a No vote why should it change? If the people of Scotland vote no then it should be sending the message out saying we like what we have
		
Click to expand...

Bet you do as it's more than the rest of us get!


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The theory goes that any bank wishing to print their own Â£ (BoE/RBS/BoS/Clydesdale) need to deposit a Â£ for every Â£ they want to circulate.I read somewhere last week that there is something like Â£6 Billion worth of Scottish notes in circulation, so if these no longer become legal tender after any refusal to agree a currency union and the BoE refuse to 'stand behind' the 'Scottish banks', they'd need to hand back the money on deposit.Not a huge amount in the grand scheme of things, but significant enough.

I then wondered about BoE notes, and whether they also deposit Â£/Â£ with themselves?


I think I know the answer to this, but what do folk think about other UK assets, say the gold/silver reserves or RBS public ownership....would any post YES Scotland be entitled to a share?

And what do folk think about Baroso claiming it would be nearly 'impossible' for Scotland to join The EU.
		
Click to expand...

Many years ago we had something called 'The Gold Standard'  under this system the BOE held gold reserves to the value of all the bank notes in circulation.  In theory you could take a pound note to the BOE and demand it be replaced with it's gold value.   This system was abandoned by the USA and followed by all the other developed countries.   The bank notes value are now based on what they are perceived to be worth in the future, if they no longer represent the value of commodities  they could previously purchase then this is called inflation.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 17, 2014)

ger147 said:



			And you've just committed the cardinal sin for a Scot living in England i.e. referring to the English as "we".
		
Click to expand...

Yes I know I did - the 'we' referring to the English and myself


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 17, 2014)

Valentino said:



			In the event of a No vote why should it change? If the people of Scotland vote no then it should be sending the message out saying we like what we have
		
Click to expand...

hmmm - not so sure it says that - but nonetheless it would certainly say we don;t want what is on offer from the YES campaign.  But is the BT campaign actually saying to the Scottish electorate that a NO means No Change.  Because I am not so sure that the status quo is sustainable and acceptable in the long term for the English electorate.  And a NO means a long term NO.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 17, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Bet you do as it's more than the rest of us get!
		
Click to expand...

Quite - I am not so sure the BT campaign's _Best of Both Worlds_ approach will make it many friends down here in the south.


----------



## Val (Feb 17, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Bet you do as it's more than the rest of us get!
		
Click to expand...

Statistics are easily manipulated, like Scotland contributing more to the GDP per head of population and doesn't get the same percentage in return.

I don't buy this argument.


----------



## Val (Feb 17, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Quite - I am not so sure the BT campaign's _Best of Both Worlds_ approach will make it many friends down here in the south.
		
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to, all it has to do is please voters.


----------



## Val (Feb 17, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			hmmm - not so sure it says that - but nonetheless it would certainly say we don;t want what is on offer from the YES campaign.  But is the BT campaign actually saying to the Scottish electorate that a NO means No Change.  Because I am not so sure that the status quo is sustainable and acceptable in the long term for the English electorate.  And a NO means a long term NO.
		
Click to expand...

So what is going to happen in the even of a NO vote? 

No one has really commented that vocally on this front. As far as we are led to believe its going to be a case of "as you were".

Very unlikely I suppose but if there is to be a referendum afterwards then on what basis?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So what is going to happen in the even of a NO vote? 

No one has really commented that vocally on this front. As far as we are led to believe its going to be a case of "as you were".

Very unlikely I suppose but if there is to be a referendum afterwards then on what basis?
		
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that the YES campaign don't want to go too much down the 'what-if' NO route as that becomes negative and would mirror what the YES campaign is critical of the BT campaign for doing - that is playing on fear of change.  Indeed it seemed to me when last in Scotland earlier this year and reading daily on-line The Herald and watching the BBC Scotland news on a regular basis, that really not a lot is being made by the YES campaign about what may or may not happen in the eventuality of a NO.  But I think that it is a reasonable question to ask of BT.  Of course BT would probably say that they cannot speak for what Westminster might do in the future - and Westminster of course will say that it has no comment on a Scottish affair - except it clearly now does.  

So for instance 'does a NO mean No Change in such as the Barnett formula for the foreseeable future?'. Because unless the answer to that question is 'there will be no change in the Barnett formula in the foreseeable future' then Scotland might as well get used to the idea of budget cuts as they may well come - and that the English electorate may come to demand.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 18, 2014)

The Barnett Formula; as a simple calculation based on head count seems fair but... free prescriptions, free university education, free parking at hospitals... funding infrastructure development I don't have a problem with but funding the above, especially for some Scots who are better off than some English, you're having a laugh.

If its a YES vote, fine carry on with your free x,y,z. If its a NO vote, I hope that the money recieved under the Barnett Formula is reduced to reflect the fact you're obviously receiving too much if you can afford the freebie's.

In truth, sadly, I feel that so much power has been devolved to the Scottish parliament you might as well go your own way anyway. Let's face it, if the UK government passes a law, which is also law in Scotland, and a Scottish local authority can usurp that law with impunity... yes, bedroom tax is disgraceful but its still the law until its changed by due process.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

The answer to the question is there is a general election several months after the Scottish vote so no-one knows who the Government in Westminster will be.

So unless you're into Astrology...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 18, 2014)

ger147 said:



			The answer to the question is there is a general election several months after the Scottish vote so no-one knows who the Government in Westminster will be.

So unless you're into Astrology...
		
Click to expand...

Which is true - but all three main parties seemed to be able to state an agreed position on 'sterling-zone' - and it's not as if they each don't have time to decide between now and 18/09 on their positions.

@Hobbit has reflected a view that I think may gain a broader constituency down here in the coming 7months.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 18, 2014)

Funny how folk do not seem to get the possibility that the Scottish Government are managing their share of the UK budget in a more successful way than rUK.
I dread to think what the total housing benefit sum for the 'home' counties is and who pays it?


----------



## Rumpokid (Feb 18, 2014)

So  if Alex Salmond wants half of UK assets if he gets the vote,(Bank of England being one of them, although this cannot be defined as an asset), maybe he would be so kind as to take in a few economic migrants from English towns and cities to alleviate pressures on services etc, as these are an asset to the UK economy eh?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Funny how folk do not seem to get the possibility that the Scottish Government are managing their share of the UK budget in a more successful way than rUK.
I dread to think what the total housing benefit sum for the 'home' counties is and who pays it?
		
Click to expand...

Which may well be the case but that knowledge doesn't take away resentments on these things when they also find out that the per head grant is grater than in England.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Which may well be the case but that knowledge doesn't take away resentments on these things when they also find out that the per head grant is grater than in England.
		
Click to expand...

Per head GDP is also greater in Scotland but the Daily Mail don't print that.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 18, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Per head GDP is also greater in Scotland but the Daily Mail don't print that.
		
Click to expand...

...again I haven't noticed that this 'fact' (as there will no doubt be some who dispute it) is understood and accepted as a basis for Scots getting freebies that the rest of us don't.  The DM headline is much simpler and easy to understand.  Scots per head grant > English per head grant;  Scots get more free 'services'.  Easy to make one the consequence of the other.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 18, 2014)

Rumpokid said:



			So  if Alex Salmond wants half of UK assets if he gets the vote,(Bank of England being one of them, although this cannot be defined as an asset), maybe he would be so kind as to take in a few economic migrants from English towns and cities to alleviate pressures on services etc, as these are an asset to the UK economy eh?
		
Click to expand...

I think you will find there are economic migrants in Scotland already.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...again I haven't noticed that this 'fact' (as there will no doubt be some who dispute it) is understood and accepted as a basis for Scots getting freebies that the rest of us don't.  The DM headline is much simpler and easy to understand.  Scots per head grant > English per head grant;  Scots get more free 'services'.  Easy to make one the consequence of the other.
		
Click to expand...

We earn more per head, we spend more per head. Couldn't be any simpler.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 18, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			I think you will find there are economic migrants in Scotland already.
		
Click to expand...

Yes .....most are English OAP's.
Another couple in our village this week

Ps. If you check the facts....Ger 147 is correct.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Im looking forward to Scotland being independent now - never thought i would say that until recent months.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Yes .....most are English OAP's.
Another couple in our village this week

Ps. If you check the facts....Ger 147 is correct.
		
Click to expand...

I really do doubt that retired English people fall into the category of economic migrants; with regard to your post script, I haven't the faintest idea what you are referring to.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

ger147 said:



			We earn more per head, we spend more per head. Couldn't be any simpler.
		
Click to expand...

From the figures I've seen, that's only if you include revenue from North Sea Oil/Gas. Excluding NSOG, earnings are slightly less than rUK

That will be the (next big?) challenge for the the politicians - whether/how to decide the percentage of that that belongs to rUK! at the moment, it seems to be assumed that it's simply going to be annexed by Scotland!


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Im looking forward to Scotland being independent now - never thought i would say that until recent months.
		
Click to expand...

I very much doubt it will happen. I have not seen a single opinion poll putting Yes at 50% or more and most of the folk I know can see all the recent announcements/speeches for what they are, just more politics.

The bottom line is that the people of Scotland are being asked to vote for an idea, and come the day of the vote we won't have any more idea of what a post-Yes future would hold than we do today, and on that basis I do not believe that a majority of the currently Undecided voters will be prepared to take that gamble.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 18, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			The Barnett Formula; as a simple calculation based on head count seems fair but... free prescriptions, free university education, free parking at hospitals... funding infrastructure development I don't have a problem with but funding the above, especially for some Scots who are better off than some English, you're having a laugh.
		
Click to expand...


The NHS in Scotland has a budget, as does the NHS in England and they decide how to spend that budget. So, for example, in Scotland you get free prescriptions and in England you get access to modern cancer medication. I know which I'd prefer.

So if you want to argue about the overall level of budget funding, fair enough, but don't nit-pick what they do with it.

......Oh, and try parking at the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary without paying and see where that gets you!


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Im looking forward to Scotland being independent now - never thought i would say that until recent months.
		
Click to expand...

Why?


----------



## Rumpokid (Feb 18, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			I think you will find there are economic migrants in Scotland already.
		
Click to expand...

..so you have towns like Boston,Thetford, Margate,Dover,..Bradford, Manchester,London etc etc....Maybe try visiting them,and see what a difference the last few years have made,I never said Scotland do not have migrants, I asked if the kind hearted braveheart Alex Salmond would help out a bit..


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 18, 2014)

ger147 said:



			We earn more per head, we spend more per head. Couldn't be any simpler.
		
Click to expand...

I can understand that.  But for many the truth is what the people believe having read it on the front page of the DM or wherever.  But there is some resentment down here at what are perceived to be Scottish 'freebies' and the inequality of it all.  A NO could well raise the level of that resentment.  A misunderstanding or lack of understanding of the point of, and benefits of, devolution.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			From the figures I've seen, that's only if you include revenue from North Sea Oil/Gas. Excluding NSOG, earnings are slightly less than rUK

That will be the (next big?) challenge for the the politicians - whether/how to decide the percentage of that that belongs to rUK! at the moment, it seems to be assumed that it's simply going to be annexed by Scotland!
		
Click to expand...

But you have to include NSOG, why wouldn't you?


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I can understand that.  But for many the truth is what the people believe having read it on the front page of the DM or wherever.  But there is some resentment down here at what are perceived to be Scottish 'freebies' and the inequality of it all.  A NO could well raise the level of that resentment. * A misunderstanding or lack of understanding of the point of, and benefits of, devolution*.
		
Click to expand...

People will only see and believe what they want regardless of how often they are told.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Rumpokid said:



			..so you have towns like Boston,Thetford, Margate,Dover,..Bradford, Manchester,London etc etc....Maybe try visiting them,and see what a difference the last few years have made,I never said Scotland do not have migrants, I asked if the kind hearted braveheart Alex Salmond would help out a bit..
		
Click to expand...

In what way? And where do these migrants come from?


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I can understand that.  But for many the truth is what the people believe having read it on the front page of the DM or wherever.  But there is some resentment down here at what are perceived to be Scottish 'freebies' and the inequality of it all.  A NO could well raise the level of that resentment.  A misunderstanding or lack of understanding of the point of, and benefits of, devolution.
		
Click to expand...

I can't think of a more ludicrous reason to vote Yes than being afraid of the reaction from down south if you vote No.

What's the plan, ban Tartan again?


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 18, 2014)

Rumpokid said:



			..so you have towns like Boston,Thetford, Margate,Dover,..Bradford, Manchester,London etc etc....Maybe try visiting them,and see what a difference the last few years have made,I never said Scotland do not have migrants, I asked if the kind hearted braveheart Alex Salmond would help out a bit..
		
Click to expand...

Here's the thing, we have economic migrants in Scotland who don't want to be in England, there are economic migrants in England who are there because they don't want to be in Scotland; If I am picking you up correctly, you seem to be advocating some sort of forced removal of some of the ones in England and resettling them in Scotland.

Purely out of interest, when do you plan to invade Poland and annex Austria?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

Rumpokid said:



			..so you have towns like Boston,Thetford, Margate,Dover,..Bradford, Manchester,London etc etc....Maybe try visiting them,and see what a difference the last few years have made,I never said Scotland do not have migrants, I asked if the kind hearted *braveheart Alex Salmond *would help out a bit..
		
Click to expand...

Stereotyping, based on nationality.always a good way to go.

But to answer your question Mr Farage, you can't force folk to live where they don't want to.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			But you have to include NSOG, why wouldn't you?
		
Click to expand...

Because it suits a particular agenda.And if you MUST include it, make it plain that it's a diminishing resource and fluctuating markets make it more of a burden that an asset.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			But you have to include NSOG, why wouldn't you?
		
Click to expand...

Well, at the moment it 'belongs' to UK!

Certainly include both with/without figures - though I'm a little unsure how the 'with' allocation is made.

Scotland won't simply be granted 100% of NSOG, though it'll certainly keep the economies of the associated areas like Aberdeen - until it runs out of course!


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Because it suits a particular agenda.And if you MUST include it, make it plain that it's a diminishing resource and fluctuating markets make it more of a burden that an asset.
		
Click to expand...

Which maybe the case, but it still has to be included in any figures hemce my response to Foxholers post on GDP per head


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, at the moment it 'belongs' to UK!
		
Click to expand...

As does the assets and revenue streams held in England's borders, would Scotland post YES have claim to these assets and revenue streams too?


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Does the rUK have a claim on part of the assets in Scotland?


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			As does the assets and revenue streams held in England's borders, would Scotland post YES have claim to these assets and revenue streams too?
		
Click to expand...

That's another, associated, question! Some would suggest giving RBS back - and demanding the 75+ Billion it has cost the (r)UK!


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			That's another, associated, question! Some would suggest giving RBS back - and demanding the 75+ Billion it has cost the (r)UK!
		
Click to expand...

Of course it is, as is the question on NSOG. You can't assume one without the other, all valid questions.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Does the rUK have a claim on part of the assets in Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

I've no idea, hence the question Scotlands claim on UK assets such as the pound, EU membership etc. 

Why has no one asked Salmond the question that if iScotland has claim on these assets then by definition should rUK have claim on assets within Scotlands borders?


----------



## One Planer (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I've no idea, hence the question Scotlands claim on UK assets such as the pound, EU membership etc. 

Why has no one asked Salmond the question that if iScotland has claim on these assets then by definition should rUK have claim on assets within Scotlands borders?
		
Click to expand...

I think it's a very good question personally and I'd be flabergasted if, as you say, no one has asked the question before now.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I've no idea, hence the question Scotlands claim on UK assets such as the pound, EU membership etc.
		
Click to expand...

These are somewhat intangible - like goodwill in a business - when actually coming to value total assets.



Valentino said:



			Why has no one asked Salmond the question that if iScotland has claim on these assets then by definition should rUK have claim on assets within Scotlands borders?
		
Click to expand...

With the assumption, possibly not a valid one, that whatever is physically in either entity now is that entity's share and will stay with the entity. Like Rail and Road networks (and NSOG!).


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			With the assumption, possibly not a valid one, that whatever is physically in either entity now is that entity's share and will stay with the entity. Like Rail and Road networks (and NSOG!).
		
Click to expand...

If you are assuming that entity's share stay's with the entity then we go back to why you have to include NSOG revenue in proportion to GDP per head in Scotland.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I've no idea, hence the question Scotlands claim on UK assets such as the pound, EU membership etc. 

Why has no one asked Salmond the question that if iScotland has claim on these assets then by definition should rUK have claim on assets within Scotlands borders?
		
Click to expand...

Using this logic we're due 10% of The City?Or 10% of Crossrail?10% of Judy Dench?


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Using this logic we're due 10% of The City?Or 10% of Crossrail?10% of Judy Dench?
		
Click to expand...

Thats the question though, if rUK has a claim on Scotlands assets then by assumption the same logic should be applied in reverse so technically yes.

BUT, did you have to use Judy Dench?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Thats the question though, if rUK has a claim on Scotlands assets then by assumption the same logic should be applied in reverse so technically yes.

BUT, did you have to use Judy Dench?
		
Click to expand...

I'd love 10% of Dench.

But seriously, I used the City as an extreme example of something entirely in England that Scotland has zero right to, just like our excise on whisky and Oil, The R&A  and Irn Bru would be exclusive assets of Scotland.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'd love 10% of Dench.

But seriously, I used the City as an extreme example of something entirely in England that Scotland has zero right to, just like our excise on whisky and Oil, The R&A  and Irn Bru would be exclusive assets of Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely, 100% spot on IMO.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 18, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I can't think of a more ludicrous reason to vote Yes than being afraid of the reaction from down south if you vote No.

What's the plan, ban Tartan again?
		
Click to expand...

I am not suggesting it is a reason to vote YES - all I am saying is that there is some resentment in England about what are perceived as unfair inequalities between countries in a United Kingdom.  

If I were undecided then I might well want to understand and take into consideration what changes are possible from the status quo post a NO vote.  And changes to funding through the Barnett formula are one possible change.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Using this logic we're due 10% of The City?Or 10% of Crossrail?10% of Judy Dench?
		
Click to expand...

And (only) 10% of NSOG.

Welcome to 10% of the water covering bits of Surrey that it wouldn't normally.

Another Barnet formula required? He suggested a review was require years ago anyway! 

It doesn't just stop there. The major beneficiary of the M6 from above the Midlands is Scotland. So should Scotland be responsible for that maintenance? What about subsidies on Rail lines to Scotland? Lucky HS2 is purely rUK

Of course, the obvious way to 'claim' the 10% is with a 'No' vote! A 'Yes' vote means some sort of division of assets and a 'fresh start' - albeit with existing, and proposed, policies.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I am not suggesting it is a reason to vote YES - all I am saying is that there is some resentment in England about what are perceived as unfair inequalities between countries in a United Kingdom.  

If I were undecided then I might well want to understand and take into consideration what changes are possible from the status quo post a NO vote.  And changes to funding through the Barnett formula are one possible change.
		
Click to expand...

Who has said there would be any change post NO?


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I am not suggesting it is a reason to vote YES - all I am saying is that there is some resentment in England about what are perceived as unfair inequalities between countries in a United Kingdom.  

If I were undecided then I might well want to understand and take into consideration what changes are possible from the status quo post a NO vote.  And changes to funding through the Barnett formula are one possible change.
		
Click to expand...

There will be no change to the status quo i.e. there will still be a devolved parliament in Scotland and a parliament in London.

The Barnett formula is no more part of the status quo than are current tax rates etc. Scotland and England have been joined for over 300 years and the Barnett formula only came into being in the late 1970's. It has already been revised downwards once, reducing Scotland's % and as it is based on population split, if it needs to be revised again it should be. It is part of the normal business of government and is a complete red herring IMO in the Independence or not for Scotland.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And (only) 10% of NSOG.

Welcome to 10% of the water covering bits of Surrey that it wouldn't normally.

Another Barnet formula required? He suggested a review was require years ago anyway! 

It doesn't just stop there. The major beneficiary of the M6 from above the Midlands is Scotland. So should Scotland be responsible for that maintenance? What about subsidies on Rail lines to Scotland? Lucky HS2 is purely rUK

Of course, the obvious way to 'claim' the 10% is with a 'No' vote! A 'Yes' vote means some sort of division of assets and a 'fresh start' - albeit with existing, and proposed, policies.
		
Click to expand...

We have enough water thank you, Surrey can keep theirs.

As to your comment on the M6, I think you will find that finishes in Cumbria. If you think Scotland are the major beneficiary of the M6 you are alienating yourself from NW England, in particular Manchester and Liverpool who have a combined population of more than half of Scotland (according to Wikipedia)


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			If you are assuming that entity's share stay's with the entity then we go back to why you have to include NSOG revenue in proportion to GDP per head in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

*I'm* not assuming anything!

I stated '*the* assumption' and noted 'possibly not a valid one'.

I believe what assets, real or intangible, are to be allocated to each entity, and in what proportion, would be part of post 'Yes' vote  negotiation. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't get to the level of detail about which gets which bits of Dame Judi though!


----------



## Imurg (Feb 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Lucky HS2 is purely rUK
		
Click to expand...

But it's not is it...well HS2 is but HS4...?

Eventually, it's due to roll into Scotland, linking both extreme ends of Europe by HS rail......


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 18, 2014)

Can Scotland negotiate Rangers and Celtic for Durham City, Blyth Spartans, Preston North End and Carlisle United .


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And (only) 10% of NSOG.

Welcome to 10% of the water covering bits of Surrey that it wouldn't normally.

Another Barnet formula required? He suggested a review was require years ago anyway! 

It doesn't just stop there. The major beneficiary of the M6 from above the Midlands is Scotland. So should Scotland be responsible for that maintenance? What about subsidies on Rail lines to Scotland? Lucky HS2 is purely rUK

Of course, the obvious way to 'claim' the 10% is with a 'No' vote! A 'Yes' vote means some sort of division of assets and a 'fresh start' - albeit with existing, and proposed, policies.
		
Click to expand...

I've read this a few times now and it makes less sense each time, so I'll stop trying.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			We have enough water thank you, Surrey can keep theirs.

As to your comment on the M6, I think you will find that finishes in Cumbria. If you think Scotland are the major beneficiary of the M6 you are alienating yourself from NW England, in particular Manchester and Liverpool who have a combined population of more than half of Scotland (according to Wikipedia)
		
Click to expand...

Oops. I keep thinking of them as 'Midlands'. I apologise to both areas!  

Past about Preston/M55 was the point I meant.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



*I'm* not assuming anything!

I stated '*the* assumption' and noted 'possibly not a valid one'.

I believe what assets, real or intangible, are to be allocated to each entity, and in what proportion, would be part of post 'Yes' vote  negotiation. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't get to the level of detail about which gets which bits of Dame Judi though! 

Click to expand...

Ok, would it be fair to assume, your belief is the same as an assumption? 

I wasnt suggest it was you personally making the assumption just referencing your post.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Oops. I keep thinking of them as 'Midlands'. I apologise to both areas!  

Past about Preston/M55 was the point I meant.
		
Click to expand...

Tut tut.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I'm pretty sure it wouldn't get to the level of detail about which gets which bits of Dame Judi though! 

Click to expand...

It seems a tad inhumane to dissect our greatest actresses though. I propose a compromise. You can keep Dame Judi..... and we'll have Helen Mirren!

:whoo:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Who has said there would be any change post NO?
		
Click to expand...

Quite - but who has said there won't be?  That's rather important if you are voting FOR the status quo if the status quo is going to change but you don't know how and to what extent.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Quite - but who has said there won't be?  That's rather important if you are voting FOR the status quo if the status quo is going to change but you don't know how and to what extent.
		
Click to expand...


Lots of ifs and buts though.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Tut tut.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sure the Nor'Westers will forgive me - as 'Foreign'!

Never much liked Roses (any colour) or Thistles either

(Silver) Ferns on the other hand....


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It seems a tad inhumane to dissect our greatest actresses though. I propose a compromise. You can keep Dame Judi..... *and we'll have Helen Mirren!*

:whoo:
		
Click to expand...

she'll be our best Buddy.Sorry.

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...tish-referendum-independent-scaremongering-eu


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Lots of ifs and buts though.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed - exactly.  If and buts both sides of the argument - though clarification by the YES campaign seems to be sought and demanded by BT more than the other way around.  And that is a fair challenge - as the change following a YES will clearly be of much more significance than that following a NO.   But that doesn't mean to say that clarification on some issues from the BT camp wouldn't go amiss.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Why?
		
Click to expand...

Because of the attitude of certain scottish people and their desire to be rid of us - you would think the English/Uk have been holding them back all these years.

I thought the Anti English feeling was mainly down to sports banter and rivalry but over the last couple of months i have never read so much bitterness. 

im guessing i was lucky in the military to see each nation working so well together - shame some people want to ruin that


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Because of the attitude of certain scottish people and their desire to be rid of us - you would think the English/Uk have been holding them back all these years.

I thought the Anti English feeling was mainly down to sports banter and rivalry but over the last couple of months i have never read so much bitterness. 

im guessing i was lucky in the military to see each nation working so well together - shame some people want to ruin that
		
Click to expand...

It's either your insecurity or your arrogance that sees it that way.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 18, 2014)

I disagree about people needing confirmation of the status quo from the BT campaign.

As I see it, the vote is for who is in charge, not over individual policies. The BT campaign is for the overall authority to remain in Westminster. Beyond that, no-one can say anything, because everything changes with each party in power. Things like the Barnett formula are temporary, and always change. Any promises regarding that would be crazy. 

The answers that the Yes campaign should be providing are massive massive things, like currency. You don't need answers about things like that from the BT campaign. I can give you there answer - if you vote No, you will keep the pound. There we go. Now, about that Yes answer...


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			.....
I thought the Anti English feeling was mainly down to sports banter and rivalry but over the last couple of months i have never read so much bitterness. 

im guessing i was lucky in the military to see each nation working so well together - shame some people want to ruin that
		
Click to expand...

I believe your beloved Reds had a fairly good relationship with Scots as well!

I certainly prefer Hanson's gutteral  mid-scottish accent to Gerard's nasaly whine!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 18, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I disagree about people needing confirmation of the status quo from the BT campaign.

As I see it, the vote is for who is in charge, not over individual policies. The BT campaign is for the overall authority to remain in Westminster. Beyond that, no-one can say anything, because everything changes with each party in power. Things like the Barnett formula are temporary, and always change. Any promises regarding that would be crazy. 

The answers that the Yes campaign should be providing are massive massive things, like currency. You don't need answers about things like that from the BT campaign. I can give you there answer - if you vote No, you will keep the pound. There we go. Now, about that Yes answer...
		
Click to expand...

I accept that most status quo issues uncertainties are nothing like as critical as some iScot questions.  However are the Conservatives going to campaign on staying IN the EU come the EU In/Out referendum?  I guess that Labour will and Lib-Dems certainly will.  But what of the Conservatives?  Clearly this will remain unanswered - but it is something about the status quo that is very important and that us completely uncertain.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It's either your insecurity or your arrogance that sees it that way.
		
Click to expand...


Are you not desperate for Scotland to be independent ?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I believe your beloved Reds had a fairly good relationship with Scots as well!

I certainly prefer Hanson's gutteral  mid-scottish accent to Gerard's nasaly whine!
		
Click to expand...


Always had a wonderful relationship with Scots - very close to Celtic. 

Some of my best friends are Jockanese - have great banter with them. They want us to stay as UK


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

Another cost of a Yes vote, all Poundlands in Scotland would have to be re-named.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Always had a wonderful relationship with Scots - very close to Celtic. 

Some of my best friends are *Jockanese *- have great banter with them. They want us to stay as UK
		
Click to expand...

When I say that I am accused of being racist


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			she'll be our best Buddy.Sorry.

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...tish-referendum-independent-scaremongering-eu

Click to expand...

Good post
Interesting bit about fUK also having to re-negotiate their rights with Brussels.
I never thought about that.
Perhaps that is what is causing The Chancellors panic.

[fUK for those who do not like r or d UK [ f = former... for the mods]


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Good post
Interesting bit about fUK also having to re-negotiate their rights with Brussels.
I never thought about that.
Perhaps that is what is causing The Chancellors panic.

[fUK for those who do not like r or d UK [ f = former... for the mods]
		
Click to expand...

I thought the fUK thing and EU had been mentioned.  And untangling Scotland from the EU and rewriting all the EU legislation that accommodates Scots Law. Yes - quite a mess untangling Scotland from the EU and re-negotiating fUK engagement.


----------



## Rumpokid (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It's either your insecurity or your arrogance that sees it that way.
		
Click to expand...

Probably neither.It is just his opinion,and he is entitled to it.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Because of the attitude of certain scottish people and their desire to be rid of us - you would think the English/Uk have been holding them back all these years.

I thought the Anti English feeling was mainly down to sports banter and rivalry but over the last couple of months i have never read so much bitterness. 

im guessing i was lucky in the military to see each nation working so well together - shame some people want to ruin that
		
Click to expand...

So you tar us all with the same brush?


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Always had a wonderful relationship with Scots - very close to Celtic. 

Some of my best friends are Jockanese - have great banter with them. They want us to stay as UK
		
Click to expand...

Glad to see racism alive and well.

Who are these Jockanese you speak of, where do the come from?

Shocking


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			When I say that I am accused of being racist 

Click to expand...

You were accused and you know why, been there ire and over so let's not go there again.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You were accused and you know why, been there ire and over so let's not go there again.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for the PR Val :thup:


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Thanks for the PR Val :thup:
		
Click to expand...

You're welcome


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You're welcome
		
Click to expand...

My pleasure.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So you tar us all with the same brush?
		
Click to expand...

I do believe the post said "certain people"


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Glad to see racism alive and well.

Who are these Jockanese you speak of, where do the come from?

Shocking
		
Click to expand...

Racism ?

Really - which race is it exactly am i showing racism too ?

If you believe that is racism then dont ever go to a military site. 

That isnt racism


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Racism ?

Really - which race is it exactly am i showing racism too ?

If you believe that is racism then dont ever go to a military site. 

That isnt racism
		
Click to expand...

11 years in the Royal Engineers pal

Who are these Jockanese you speak of?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Racism ? that isnt racism
		
Click to expand...

In your opinion.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			11 years in the Royal Engineers pal

Who are these Jockanese you speak of?
		
Click to expand...

That will be Scottish People and a well known banter nickname that I have heard used by a great number of people and taken in the good humour it is meant.

Are you telling me you have never heard it being used and are you going to tell me you have never ever used a humorous phrase to call English/Welsh or Irish people


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In your opinion.
		
Click to expand...


Are a Scotland a race ?


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Are a Scotland a race ?
		
Click to expand...

A slow one?

Or is that being race-ist?

I'll get my coat!


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			That will be Scottish People and a well known banter nickname that I have heard used by a great number of people and taken in the good humour it is meant.

Are you telling me you have never heard it being used and are you going to tell me you have never ever used a humorous phrase to call English/Welsh or Irish people
		
Click to expand...

A nickname you say? Nor funny or pleasant


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Val.

I am not sure if your responses are due to you being a bit thin skinned, naive, genuinely offended or argumentative?

I know full well that you don't like me, that has been documented very clearly on your own web site where I dont have the right of reply but I can get over it.  Putting this to one side lets debate this subject with the gloves off please.

When Phil used that term (just as I have) it was a light hearted remark, the type of banter that gets used all over the world between  people of different countries.  It's not racist and I think you know that, you seem to have not lived a sheltered life and will have experienced and most probably used similar terms yourself. Jocks, Taffs, Micks, Yanks, Kiwis, Frogs, I ties, Canuks, The old enemy, Edwards Army etc, etc.  These are not racist terms, to be racist they need to assert a race is somehow inferior, no one has suggested that.

Lets all lighten up a bit and accept that none of it has been meant to create genuine harm to anyone.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			A nickname you say? Nor funny or pleasant
		
Click to expand...


Yet never heard anyone ever complain about It before and "take it in the humour it is meant"

As opposed to accuse it of being racist

I guess you think Jock is a racist term as is Taffy or Paddy !!

If you believe it to be racist then I suggest the problem lies with you 

I'm actually disgusted and insulted that you insinuated it is racist and that I used a racist term 

Believe it's things like that which devalue real racism


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

FYI.
From Oxford English (sic) Dictionary...
the belief that *all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race*, especially so as to *distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races*.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Val.

I am not sure if your responses are due to you being a bit thin skinned, naive, genuinely offended or argumentative?

I know full well that you don't like me, that has been documented very clearly on your own web site where I dont have the right of reply but I can get over it.  Putting this to one side lets debate this subject with the gloves off please.

When Phil used that term (just as I have) it was a light hearted remark, the type of banter that gets used all over the world between  people of different countries.  It's not racist and I think you know that, you seem to have not lived a sheltered life and will have experienced and most probably used similar terms yourself. Jocks, Taffs, Micks, Yanks, Kiwis, Frogs, I ties, Canuks, The old enemy, Edwards Army etc, etc.  These are not racist terms, to be racist they need to assert a race is somehow inferior, no one has suggested that.

Lets all lighten up a bit and accept that none of it has been meant to create genuine harm to anyone.
		
Click to expand...

Edwards Army seems to be clutching at straws for a term offensive to the English.
Is it because you could not think of one.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 18, 2014)

Ding Ding, all aboard the offended bus


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Edwards Army seems to be clutching at straws for a term offensive to the English.
Is it because you could not think of one.
		
Click to expand...

Isn't 'English' enough?

Poms? Pommies?


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Val.

I am not sure if your responses are due to you being a bit thin skinned, naive, genuinely offended or argumentative?

I know full well that you don't like me, that has been documented very clearly on your own web site where I dont have the right of reply but I can get over it.  Putting this to one side lets debate this subject with the gloves off please.

When Phil used that term (just as I have) it was a light hearted remark, the type of banter that gets used all over the world between  people of different countries.  It's not racist and I think you know that, you seem to have not lived a sheltered life and will have experienced and most probably used similar terms yourself. Jocks, Taffs, Micks, Yanks, Kiwis, Frogs, I ties, Canuks, The old enemy, Edwards Army etc, etc.  These are not racist terms, to be racist they need to assert a race is somehow inferior, no one has suggested that.

Lets all lighten up a bit and accept that none of it has been meant to create genuine harm to anyone.
		
Click to expand...

Don't flatter yourself Brian, there are a select few I dislike and you are not one if them. I should add you not wanting to come on my website is your choice, I'm not going to promote it here those who want to find it can do (mods, I'm just replying to SR's comment no promoting)

As for the term Jockanese, I'm not offended I just find it patronising, why not just say Scottish?

Back on topic, this topic is not about me or racism.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Edwards Army seems to be clutching at straws for a term offensive to the English.
Is it because you could not think of one.
		
Click to expand...



I'm sure the Jocks have come up with plenty of the years


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Edwards Army seems to be clutching at straws for a term offensive to the English.
Is it because you could not think of one.
		
Click to expand...

OK, how about, Scousers, Geordies, Cockney, Janners, Brummies, Yam Yams.  Are these all racist terms?


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Edwards Army seems to be clutching at straws for a term offensive to the English.
Is it because you could not think of one.
		
Click to expand...

I was once called a white paki up here


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

The Mackems will be upset at not being on that list!

Anyway. what was this thread about?


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			OK, how about, Scousers, Geordies, Cockney, Janners, Brummies, Yam Yams.  Are these all racist terms?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, if deemed so by someone who it is aimed.

Guys please can we ditch this and back to the Scotland debate?


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Don't flatter yourself Brian, there are a select few I dislike and you are not one if them. I should add you not wanting to come on my website is your choice, I'm not going to promote it here those who want to find it can do (mods, I'm just replying to SR's comment no promoting)

As for the term Jockanese, I'm not offended I just find it patronising, why not just say Scottish?

Back on topic, this topic is not about me or racism.
		
Click to expand...

But it's not racist is it?  

Anyhow, fair enough, back on topic.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 18, 2014)

Jockanese.....never heard of it until just now.

Sounds like someone trying to hard to be Alan Partridge.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Jockanese.....never heard of it until just now.

Sounds like someone trying to hard to be Alan Partridge.
		
Click to expand...

The expression is years old


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			[fUK for those who do not like r or d UK [ f = former... for the mods]
		
Click to expand...

Believe that and you'd believe anything


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Yes, if deemed so by someone who it is aimed.
		
Click to expand...

And one last comment on this.

My understanding is that, according to (the? English?) Law, certain descriptions are deemed racist by 'society'. But just because a person deems an expression to be racist, does not automatically mean that is racist. I think I got that right. It was stated by a fairly 'high-up' solicitor.

May be different in Scotland of course!


----------



## Wendy (Feb 18, 2014)

As a new person this thread makes very sad reading. Casual racism and dig after dig. Not a nice thread.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Wendy said:



			As a new person this thread makes very sad reading. Casual racism and dig after dig. Not a nice thread.
		
Click to expand...


Can you point out the "casual racism"

Far too easy to accuse people these days


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 18, 2014)

Wendy said:



			As a new person this thread makes very sad reading. Casual racism and dig after dig. Not a nice thread.
		
Click to expand...

You'll get used to the cross border banter


----------



## Farneyman (Feb 18, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			You'll get used to the cross border _banter_

Click to expand...


There's the old banter card used again.

That makes everything ok then?????

I'm really surprised that this attitude is allowed to fester here by the powers that be. Then again I'm not really the more I think about it. Shame really.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Do people really believe Jock is a racist term ! Seriously !


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 18, 2014)

No and it appears that there may be a few on hear that better steer clear of the Tower of London as there is a certain Beefeater there that might upset them as he has a very interesting take on Scots the kilt and other aspects of Scottish history, and guess what, nobody takes offence.

Get the odd hacker on a golf forum and the battle of the Caladonian NAAFI kicks off.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 18, 2014)

Farneyman said:



			There's the old banter card used again.

That makes everything ok then?????

I'm really surprised that this attitude is allowed to fester here by the powers that be. Then again I'm not really the more I think about it. Shame really.
		
Click to expand...

If you are offended by anything posted here in the last couple of pages then I would suggest that you are either:

A.  Overly sensitive.
B.  Desperate to feel offended by something, anything


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 18, 2014)

Farneyman said:



			There's the old banter card used again.

That makes everything ok then?????

I'm really surprised that this attitude is allowed to fester here by the powers that be. Then again I'm not really the more I think about it. Shame really.
		
Click to expand...

What attitude is this?? 

Are you genuinely implying that those posters who use the term "jock" are racist? If you could point out what about that term is racist (as of yet, no-one has) then I would appreciate it. Because I have used that phrase offline, and would hate for anyone to think me racist in the future, so would gladly stop using it if it has any racist connotations.


----------



## Liverbirdie (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			OK, how about, Scousers, Geordies, Cockney, Janners, Brummies, Yam Yams.  Are these all racist terms?
		
Click to expand...

The scouse one isn't beacause we are all great, sexy and brillllliiiiiannnnttttttt. The rest of you aren't.


----------



## Wendy (Feb 18, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			What attitude is this?? 

Are you genuinely implying that those posters who use the term "jock" are racist? If you could point out what about that term is racist (as of yet, no-one has) then I would appreciate it. Because I have used that phrase offline, and would hate for anyone to think me racist in the future, so would gladly stop using it if it has any racist connotations.
		
Click to expand...


I would suggest that you give serious consideration on future.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...rray-useless-jock-is-convicted-of-racism.html


----------



## Farneyman (Feb 18, 2014)

I'm just offended by people who try to justify racism of any kind by anyone as simple banter when it clearly offends _others_. Others being the key word. Just because something doesn't offend you doesn't make it ok and it also doesn't mean someone who it does offend is either

A. Overly sensitive.

or

B. Desperate to feel offended by something, anything 

Clearly some of the Scottish people here are offended by some of the terms by posters that are used but it would seem nothing is done as it continues to happen.

This is not the only thread I have noticed it on either so I'm not basing my opinion on this one thread. I've been a member here since 2008 I just don't post as often as most but I do read a lot of the threads and disappointed that these attitudes are allowed to continue.

For what it worth I don't accept being called a Paddy or a Mick or a bead rattler or any other term that_ I _think is derogatory to _me_ but to some people its ok as its only banter...not in _my_ eyes. 

Anyway back to the big debate...

Aye or naw?


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

liverbirdie said:



			the scouse one innt coz wirral grey like, proper sexy and brilllll like. You lot ain't like.
		
Click to expand...

ftfy


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Farneyman said:



			I'm just offended by people who try to justify racism of any kind by anyone as simple banter when it clearly offends _others_. Others being the key word. Just because something doesn't offend you doesn't make it ok and it also doesn't mean someone who it does offend is either

A. Overly sensitive.

or

B. Desperate to feel offended by something, anything 

Clearly some of the Scottish people here are offended by some of the terms by posters that are used but it would seem nothing is done as it continues to happen.

This is not the only thread I have noticed it on either so I'm not basing my opinion on this one thread. I've been a member here since 2008 I just don't post as often as most but I do read a lot of the threads and disappointed that these attitudes are allowed to continue.

For what it worth I don't accept being called a Paddy or a Mick or a bead rattler or any other term that_ I _think is derogatory to _me_ but to some people its ok as its only banter...not in _my_ eyes. 

Anyway back to the big debate...

Aye or naw?
		
Click to expand...


So I'm a racist then and using racist terms because I call friends and family members jocks or jockanese ?


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 18, 2014)

Farneyman said:



			I'm just offended by people who try to justify racism of any kind by anyone as simple banter when it clearly offends _others_. Others being the key word. Just because something doesn't offend you doesn't make it ok and it also doesn't mean someone who it does offend is either

A. Overly sensitive.

or

B. Desperate to feel offended by something, anything 

Clearly some of the Scottish people here are offended by some of the terms by posters that are used but it would seem nothing is done as it continues to happen.

This is not the only thread I have noticed it on either so I'm not basing my opinion on this one thread. I've been a member here since 2008 I just don't post as often as most but I do read a lot of the threads and disappointed that these attitudes are allowed to continue.

For what it worth I don't accept being called a Paddy or a Mick or a bead rattler or any other term that_ I _think is derogatory to _me_ but to some people its ok as its only banter...not in _my_ eyes. 

Anyway back to the big debate...

Aye or naw?
		
Click to expand...


Well given the lack of responses, clearly Jock or Jockanese hasn't been found to be particularly offensive. Secondly, why did you feel the need to try and introduce religion into the debate.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

As many here already know I dislike the term


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			As many here already know I dislike the term
		
Click to expand...

Why? I'm yet to actually see any reasons.

The name itself stems from "John", being an ordinary person. How is this offensive?


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			As many here already know I dislike the term
		
Click to expand...

So you're not one of Jock Tamson's bairns?


----------



## Farneyman (Feb 18, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Well given the lack of responses, clearly Jock or Jockanese hasn't been found to be particularly offensive. Secondly, why did you feel the need to try and introduce religion into the debate.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry I should have made it clearer. I was giving examples of derogatory terms I have been called and don't accept and one of them was when I was referred to as a _tattie munching bead rattler_...I found it offensive then and I still do.

It was racist and sectarian all in one go but again that's for a whole new thread...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Farneyman said:



			Sorry I should have made it clearer. I was giving examples of derogatory terms I have been called and don't accept and one of them was when I was referred to as a _tattie munching bead rattler_...I found it offensive then and I still do.

It was racist and sectarian all in one go but again that's for a whole new thread...
		
Click to expand...


And Jock ? Racist ? Really ?


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverbirdie said:



			The scouse one isn't beacause we are all great, sexy and brillllliiiiiannnnttttttt. The rest of you aren't.






Click to expand...

Fair Comment :thup:


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Why? I'm yet to actually see any reasons.

The name itself stems from "John", being an ordinary person. How is this offensive?
		
Click to expand...

I can't stand the term, hated it since the day I joined the army at 16


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I can't stand the term, hated it since the day I joined the army at 16
		
Click to expand...

Why ?


----------



## Liverbirdie (Feb 18, 2014)

Please?


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why ?
		
Click to expand...

I really don't know if I'm honest, I just didn't, still don't.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverbirdie said:









Please?
		
Click to expand...

I'm sure there's many south of there would happily do so


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I really don't know if I'm honest, I just didn't, still don't.
		
Click to expand...


But racist though ? 

Yes possibly could understand not liking it when people use it in a derogatory manner but even then it's insulting not racist


----------



## Rumpokid (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I can't stand the term, hated it since the day I joined the army at 16
		
Click to expand...

Name game..Fill in the blanks   ---- Stein    ---- Wallace     ----- and the Geordies(Beano Cartoon Strip}...All famous folk in their own right.


----------



## Farneyman (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And Jock ? Racist ? Really ?
		
Click to expand...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...rray-useless-jock-is-convicted-of-racism.html

If you read this then it would appear so...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Farneyman said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...rray-useless-jock-is-convicted-of-racism.html

If you read this then it would appear so...
		
Click to expand...

So using the term jock is now racist because one guy as convicted of abusing someone ?!

Blimey I have been racially abusing my sister in law all these years !!

That detracts from the true racist abuse


----------



## Farneyman (Feb 18, 2014)

I don't make the law. I just try to follow it.

Anyway it has been mentioned here on GM numerous times that some people find it offensive but heyho nothing is happening so if you want to carry on using it, knock yourself out. I for one wont.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			EDIT - oops, questions already answered - ignore post!
		
Click to expand...


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 18, 2014)

Farneyman said:



			I don't make the law. I just try to follow it.

Anyway it has been mentioned here on GM numerous times that some people find it offensive but heyho nothing is happening so if you want to carry on using it, knock yourself out. I for one wont.
		
Click to expand...

Has it? I've seen Valentino mention that he/she doesn't like it, but nothing that suggests "numerous" people find it offensive.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Farneyman said:



			I don't make the law. I just try to follow it.

Anyway it has been mentioned here on GM numerous times that some people find it offensive but heyho nothing is happening so if you want to carry on using it, knock yourself out. I for one wont.
		
Click to expand...

So should I be arrested and charged for using he term "jock" or "jockanese" ?

Lots of people could well be I'm trouble very soon

Lots of nicknames need changing - believe there is also some cartoon characters called jock 

Never heard anyone find the term offensive until now - and I'm truly amazed.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

Farneyman said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...rray-useless-jock-is-convicted-of-racism.html

If you read this then it would appear so...
		
Click to expand...

Absolute nonsense!!!

If the post office chap in question had called Wayne Rooney an "English (insert derogatory sweary word)", he would also have been found guilty of racially aggravated criminal damage. That does NOT mean calling someone English becomes racist.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So using the term jock is now racist because one guy as convicted of abusing someone ?!

Blimey I have been racially abusing my sister in law all these years !!

That detracts from the true racist abuse
		
Click to expand...

It appears so, unless the judges have it wrong too.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 18, 2014)

I have a Highland mate and you should hear what he calls the Lowlanders, now that is close to the mark.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It appears so, unless the judges have it wrong too.
		
Click to expand...

Don't you think it might have been in context of the overall case and not based on a term of in-dearment


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Don't you think it might have been in context of the overall case and not based on a term of in-dearment
		
Click to expand...

I don't know is the honest answer, the word racist was used. I don't think that's open to debate. It either is or isn't


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

From the CPS website:


To prove that an offence is racially or religiously aggravated, the prosecution has to prove the "basic" offence followed by racial or religious aggravation, as defined in section 28 Crime and Disorder Act 1998. An offence will be racially or religiously aggravated if:


a) at the time of the offence (or shortly before or after), the offender demonstrates to the victim hostility based on the victim's membership (or presumed membership) of a racial or religious group, or


b) the offence is motivated wholly or partly by hostility towards members of a racial or religious group based on their membership (or presumed membership) of that group.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/racist_and_religious_crime/


A bit more too it than using the word Jock to a Scotsman...


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I don't know is the honest answer, the word racist was used. I don't think that's open to debate. It either is or isn't
		
Click to expand...

That definitely is open to debate.

The phrase "racially aggravated" was used. Not racist. Anything beyond racially aggravated is the writings of the newspaper, and I would argue, attempting to gain readers through emotive language.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			That definitely is open to debate.

The phrase "racially aggravated" was used. Not racist. Anything beyond racially aggravated is the writings of the newspaper, and I would argue, attempting to gain readers through emotive language.
		
Click to expand...

Ok racially aggravated, so does that make it ok?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I don't know is the honest answer, the word racist was used. I don't think that's open to debate. It either is or isn't
		
Click to expand...


Ok here is my view 

I I use the term jock/jockanese to describe my Scottish friends in a humorous light hearted banter way and it is taken that way

I have used those terms for over 20 years now and not one single person has been offended let alone against me of being racist or using a racist term 

So what do you think ? Based on what you say - I'm racially abusing my friends and family ? Yes ?


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

You have to take it in context.   He was not convicted just for using the word  'Jock' As mentioned in an earlier post: Racism is where someone suggests a race is inferior or that theirs is superior.  He was also guilty of criminal damage.

"He denied the charges but was found guilty of three counts of criminal damage and two of racially aggravated criminal damage."


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Ok racially aggravated, so does that make it ok?
		
Click to expand...

He was convicted for criminal damage and it was racially aggravated as he was abusing someone for being Scottish. If he has scrawled "Scottish ......" he would have been convicted just the same, but the word Scottish would not become racist.

Do you not see the distinction or are you simply ignoring it?


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Farneyman said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...rray-useless-jock-is-convicted-of-racism.html

If you read this then it would appear so...
		
Click to expand...

The actually offense was 'Racially Aggravated Criminal Damage' - there's no actual 'Racism' offense as such. 
However, I'm almost certain the same charge would have been made, and succeeded if he'd written '...useless Scot'! So not necessarily the word itself, but the context is important as well.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Ok here is my view 

I I use the term jock/jockanese to describe my Scottish friends in a humorous light hearted banter way and it is taken that way

I have used those terms for over 20 years now and not one single person has been offended let alone against me of being racist or using a racist term 

So what do you think ? Based I want you say - I'm racially abusing my friends and family ? Yes ?
		
Click to expand...

Why are you trying to justify it?

Call it what you like, it's casual racism, not different to what corner shops run by Pakistanis or chinese take outs get called.

Just because no one has complained until now doesn't make it acceptable.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Why are you trying to justify it?

Call it what you like, it's casual racism, not different to what corner shops run by Pakistanis or chinese take outs get called.

Just because no one has complained until now doesn't make it acceptable.
		
Click to expand...

So you think I'm racially abusing my friends and family and it's unacceptable ?


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

ger147 said:



			He was convicted for criminal damage and it was racially aggravated as he was abusing someone for being Scottish. If he has scrawled "Scottish ......" he would have been convicted just the same, but the word Scottish would not become racist.

Do you not see the distinction or are you simply ignoring it?
		
Click to expand...

I do see the distinction but you miss the point, he didn't say Scottish


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So you think I'm racially abusing my friends and family and it's unacceptable ?
		
Click to expand...

Why are you trying to justify it? Do you want it accepted?

I'll say it again in case you missed it the last time

It's casual racism. Whether it's accepted or not by family and friends is irrelevant, it is what it is


----------



## ger147 (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I do see the distinction but you miss the point, he didn't say Scottish
		
Click to expand...

The precise word used is irrelevant to whether he was convicted or not, it was abusing someone for being Scottish as well as the criminal damage that was his offence.

I'm not missing the point as the word Jock is not the point.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I do see the distinction but you miss the point, he didn't say Scottish
		
Click to expand...

You really must be being obtuse on purpose. It doesn't matter what he wrote, to make it racially aggravated. It doesn't make whatever word he used racist. It is the way it is written, intending to demean someone based on their "race"/nationality etc. Just by calling someone a Scot/Jock out of that context is not racist, it's just a name for a group of people. It doesn't imply worse/better etc. 

And regarding Pakistani corner shops, the reason that word became contentious was because it was used as an agressive insulting term. Jock, however, isn't. Just like Taff, Mick etc etc.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			You really must be being obtuse on purpose. It doesn't matter what he wrote, to make it racially aggravated. It doesn't make whatever word he used racist. It is the way it is written, intending to demean someone based on their "race"/nationality etc. Just by calling someone a Scot/Jock out of that context is not racist, it's just a name for a group of people. It doesn't imply worse/better etc. 

And regarding Pakistani corner shops, the reason that word became contentious was because it was used as an agressive insulting term. Jock, however, isn't. Just like Taff, Mick etc etc.
		
Click to expand...

Another trying to justify it being ok


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Another trying to justify it being ok
		
Click to expand...

I thought we clarified that I thought it was ok a long while ago in this thread?! 

I'm yet to hear anything to suggests that it is offensive, racist, or any such like.

Does this mean I should get offended at being called a Taff? Damn, I haven't been. Can I claim that being called Short is offensive to me as well now? Think it's called "height-ist". I mean, I always thought that it was someone pointing out a fact, that I'm short, just like pointing out a Jock is from Scotland.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

I've said my piece again on it, I don't particularly like the term as I find it patronising and would rather not be called it. Do I find it racist? Sometimes, all I context but as already stated I would rather it not used at me directly.

Yet again we have a thread ruined because casual racism is questioned, I didn't set out to cause trouble on the thread and merely defended my stance.

My last word on this subject, mods any chance of splitting this to get the actual thread back on track?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Why are you trying to justify it? Do you want it accepted?

I'll say it again in case you missed it the last time

It's casual racism. Whether it's accepted or not by family and friends is irrelevant, it is what it is
		
Click to expand...

Just because you deem it "casual racism" doesn't mean it actually is 

If you believe it's casual racism why haven't you taken it further ? 

I don't need to justify anything nor do I need anything accepted

You can show me where it's deemed calling someone a jock or jockanese is racism - I expect you will be able to show plenty of instances where people have been charged and punished for racism for using both words. 

Jock is not an aggressive abusive term - if anyone believes so then I think it's clear they are just looking to be offended 

I'm guessing you reported the use of the word to the RMP's whilst in the Army 

I can't stop you being offended by the word - but saying I'm using casually racism I would ask you to stop because that is offensive


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I've said my piece again on it, I don't particularly like the term as I find it patronising and would rather not be called it. Do I find it racist? Sometimes, all I context but as already stated I would rather it not used at me directly.

Yet again we have a thread ruined because casual racism is questioned, I didn't set out to cause trouble on the thread and merely defended my stance.

My last word on this subject, mods any chance of splitting this to get the actual thread back on track?
		
Click to expand...

When you accuse people of racism they will defend themselves - strongly as well

I'm actually disgusted that you just throw the word around without a thought of how damaging it can be


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Yet again we have a thread ruined because casual racism is questioned, I didn't set out to cause trouble on the thread and merely defended my stance.
		
Click to expand...

Yet again we have a thread ruined because someone raises a completely unnecessary point, and moves the attention away from it, for no reason other than they feel a little bit offended by something written out there. You knew it would go down this route. Also, you weren't called it, actually, it was used in passing in a thread by someone else I believe....


----------



## dewsweeper (Feb 18, 2014)

Wendy said:



			As a new person this thread makes very sad reading. Casual racism and dig after dig. Not a nice thread.
		
Click to expand...

Wendy,
Well said.I am afraid too many threads seem to degenerate on this forum of late.
I said this a few weeks back and someone replied and  said it is often this way when we are not playing enough golf!!
Hope they are correct,I detest the way this thread has wavered into personal accusations after some very good and well thought arguments for both views of devolution.
I am a 'cockernee' living in Cheshire and married to a girl from Greenock and have learnt from the debate that there is much more to devolution than first meets the eye,I think I am for the status quo.
DFT ,I felt your acronym 'fuk'was far below your usual considered arguments ,which I tend to agree with more often than not.
Dewsweeper


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Just because you deem it "casual racism" doesn't mean it actually is 

If you believe it's casual racism why haven't you taken it further ? 

I don't need to justify anything nor do I need anything accepted

You can show me where it's deemed calling someone a jock or jockanese is racism - I expect you will be able to show plenty of instances where people have been charged and punished for racism for using both words. 

Jock is not an aggressive abusive term - if anyone believes so then I think it's clear they are just looking to be offended 

I'm guessing you reported the use of the word to the RMP's whilst in the Army 

I can't stop you being offended by the word - but saying I'm using casually racism I would ask you to stop because that is offensive
		
Click to expand...

*What is racism?*

Racism is defined in the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report as: â€œConduct or words which advantage or disadvantage people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin. In its subtle form it is more damaging than in its overt formâ€ 

Racism can be expressed individually and consciously and also it can be through institutions that promote inequalities between races, for example: 



Physical assault because of colour ethnicity or nationality
Use of derogatory names, insults and racist jokes
Racist graffiti and other written racist material
Provocative behaviour such as wearing racist badges or insignia
Bringing racist materials into schools
Verbal abuse and threats
Incitement of others to recruit to racist organisations and groups
Ridicule of an individual for cultural difference e.g. food, music, religion, dress etc
Refusal to co-operate with other people because of their colour, ethnic origin, or nationality
Written derogatory remarks
Explain what "Jock" is then, if not a derogatory name?


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Ok, heres my take:

If I use the term: Jock, Jockaneese, Jockabite et al; I use it light heartedly and more as a term of endearment.   Just like when I call a mate of mine 'Taff'.   It's the way our sense of humour has always been in our Nation, light hearted mick taking of each other has 'in my opinion' been something that has been a symptom of our humour and bond.

I appreciate that some do seem to find it insulting and I am big enough to apologise if it has caused offence, it genuinely was not intended to.   On the other hand maybe they can also understand that none of it is to racially abuse anyone.   Regarding the Scotts, I have always considered them a great Nation that have stood shoulder by shoulder with the rest of us through the most trying times.

I hope they decide to remain with us and the Nation can move on from this time of uncertainty.   If they decide otherwise then good luck to them in their venture and we will just have to make the best of what is left.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Feb 18, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:






Explain what "Jock" is then, if not a derogatory name?

Click to expand...

A name for a group of people, from Scotland. I've not heard it used as derogatory, but purely as a describing term.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 18, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			A name for a group of people, from Scotland. I've not heard it used as derogatory, but purely as a describing term.
		
Click to expand...

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/jock_3

*English definition of â€œJockâ€     
*


*Jock*

_noun_ http://dictionary.cambridge.org/help/codes.html /dÊ’É’k/




/dÊ’É‘Ëk/ UK slang
â€º​ *A man who comes from Scotland.  This word is considered offensive by some people.
*


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

A decent conversation about the most important thing to happen in The UK since WWII ruined by folk using stupid terms and others getting too easily insulted by it.





Liverpoolphil said:



			Are you not desperate for Scotland to be independent ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes I am, but I want it done on the most amicable terms possible, which judging by the turn on this thread, is unlikley.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Ok, heres my take:

If I use the term: Jock, Jockaneese, Jockabite et al; I use it light heartedly and more as a term of endearment.   Just like when I call a mate of mine 'Taff'.   It's the way our sense of humour has always been in our Nation, light hearted mick taking of each other has 'in my opinion' been something that has been a symptom of our humour and bond.

*i appreciate that some do seem to find it insulting and I am big enough to apologise if it has caused offence, it genuinely was not intended to. *  On the other hand maybe they can also understand that none of it is to racially abuse anyone.   Regarding the Scotts, I have always considered them a great Nation that have stood shoulder by shoulder with the rest of us through the most trying times.

I hope they decide to remain with us and the Nation can move on from this time of uncertainty.   If they decide otherwise then good luck to them in their venture and we will just have to make the best of what is left.
		
Click to expand...

Does that include me?


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/jock_3

*English definition of â€œJockâ€     
*


*Jock*

_noun_ http://dictionary.cambridge.org/help/codes.html /dÊ’É’k/




/dÊ’É‘Ëk/ UK slang
â€º​ *A man who comes from Scotland.  This word is considered offensive by some people.
*


Click to expand...

You may want to try that one again


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Does that include me? 

Click to expand...

It was mainly directed at you :thup:


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A decent conversation about the most important thing to happen in The UK since WWII ruined by folk using stupid terms and others getting too easily insulted by it.
		
Click to expand...

And apologies for my part in it but I won't ever back down from something I believe in, like many here.

As to independence, is there anything in the debate that the YES campaign might not get that would be a deal breaker for you not to vote YES?


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			You may want to try that one again 

Click to expand...

I did, whilst you were typing!


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			It was mainly directed at you :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Jesus, what a night :thup:


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Jesus, what a night :thup:
		
Click to expand...

As my mate would reply:  "Its better than selling Bricks"


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			As my mate would reply:  "Its better than selling Bricks" 

Click to expand...

My days of selling bricks are gone the day I left Keyline thankfully


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			And apologies for my part in it but I won't ever back down from something I believe in, like many here.

As to independence, is there anything in the debate that the YES campaign might not get that would be a deal breaker for you not to vote YES?
		
Click to expand...

Was going to ask Adi the same thing.....

FWIW, re the "Jock" thing.... I've lived down here for 10 years so am probably numb to it now but everyone I met when I moved down here automatically called me that, even random blokes/women in a boozer id just been introduced to.  It mightily pi**ed me off, and still does if someone I don't know calls me that.  It is different in person, with friends, in context.

My username on here was, less the NW, what I was called when I started playing football down here and I use it for here almost tongue in cheek (I've been used in this sort of argument in the past and have tried to stay out of it!!)....


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Jesus, what a night :thup:
		
Click to expand...

That'd be blasphemy in some US States.:rofl:

Or even parts of rUK!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			As to independence, is there anything in the debate that the YES campaign might not get that would be a deal breaker for you not to vote YES?
		
Click to expand...

No.I'm only looking for a YES victory, nothing more.I have an opinion on currency/Europe/Nato/welfare/defence etc, and very little is in common with The SNP, but in reality, it's all window dressing, all transient jam tomorrow stuff that in the grand scheme of Nation building is unimportant.

I want to live in a country that represents itself internationally, that elects people that reflects our society and make decisions for our benefit.Right now, and i'm sure no one would disagree,Scotland is not accurately reflected by Westminster politiking and with the dramatic change in Labour policy, we never will be again.

If you're interested, Patrick Harvie would be the man I put in charge of Scotland tomorrow, the guy is head and shoulders above ANY politician in Scotland imo.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

Here's a few links to pages that reflect what I'd like Scotland to look like

http://www.allofusfirst.org/

http://reidfoundation.org/

http://nationalcollective.com/

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/

The Mondragon collective of Northern Spain is a perfect example of where I'd take guidance from, along with Germanic worker involvement...I can't ever see a situation in England where anything like any of the above is possible, but i can in Scotland, and I'd imagine there is plenty folk living in England who'd like to be involved in a new Scottish nation, and they'd be most welcome


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			No.I'm only looking for a YES victory, nothing more.I have an opinion on currency/Europe/Nato/welfare/defence etc, and very little is in common with The SNP, but in reality, it's all window dressing, all transient jam tomorrow stuff that in the grand scheme of Nation building is unimportant.

I want to live in a country that represents itself internationally, that elects people that reflects our society and make decisions for our benefit.Right now, and i'm sure no one would disagree,Scotland is not accurately reflected by Westminster politiking and with the dramatic change in Labour policy, we never will be again.

If you're interested, Patrick Harvie would be the man I put in charge of Scotland tomorrow, the guy is head and shoulders above ANY politician in Scotland imo.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting, I've a mate who says exactly the same as you just did and I called him a fantasy voter as he is looking for something not on offer, but understand the sentiment in regards of proper representation at international levels etc. I don't by the unelected government in Scotland thing as we are part of the UK and the system is what it is as part of the union, the south didn't make this comment when we had a labour government.

As much as I'd love an independent Scotland I cannot see anything the yes campaign have on offer which will come to fruition that would sway me to them, right now I'm in the NO camp.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			No.I'm only looking for a YES victory, nothing more.I have an opinion on currency/Europe/Nato/welfare/defence etc, and very little is in common with The SNP, but in reality, it's all window dressing, all transient jam tomorrow stuff that in the grand scheme of Nation building is unimportant.

I want to live in a country that represents itself internationally, that elects people that reflects our society and make decisions for our benefit.Right now, and i'm sure no one would disagree,Scotland is not accurately reflected by Westminster politiking and with the dramatic change in Labour policy, we never will be again.

If you're interested, Patrick Harvie would be the man I put in charge of Scotland tomorrow, the guy is head and shoulders above ANY politician in Scotland imo.
		
Click to expand...

There are a lot of Scotts in Parliament.  I guess if you cannot accept Scotland in the UK parliament as a proportional part of one Nation then you should vote 'Yes'.   On the other side of the case is the fact that Scottish MPs can vote on matters that only affect England but English MPs cannot do the same on Scottish matters.    Maybe a better system would be for all the countries of the Union to have parliaments that decide their own issues within their budgets and sit together on National issues only.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			No.I'm only looking for a YES victory, nothing more.I have an opinion on currency/Europe/Nato/welfare/defence etc, and very little is in common with The SNP, but in reality, it's all window dressing, all transient jam tomorrow stuff that in the grand scheme of Nation building is unimportant.

I want to live in a country that represents itself internationally, that elects people that reflects our society and make decisions for our benefit.Right now, and i'm sure no one would disagree,Scotland is not accurately reflected by Westminster politiking and with the dramatic change in Labour policy, we never will be again.

If you're interested, Patrick Harvie would be the man I put in charge of Scotland tomorrow, the guy is head and shoulders above ANY politician in Scotland imo.
		
Click to expand...

As I've said previously I like your views on what a Scotland could look like....

As you're not aligned with SNP, do you think an independent Scotland would/could move away from them as the ruling party in time?  Or are the majority of yes voters more aligned to SNP than yourself and tied to them as the "way forward" do you think?


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			There are a lot of Scotts in Parliament.  I guess if you cannot accept Scotland in the UK parliament as a proportional part of one Nation then you should vote 'Yes'.   On the other side of the case is the fact that Scottish MPs can vote on matters that only affect England but English MPs cannot do the same.    Maybe a better system would be for all the countries of the Union to have parliaments that decide their own issues within their budgets and sit together on National issues only.
		
Click to expand...

Like what Scotland, Wales and Ireland already have 

It's just the English that miss out on this, I see no reason why this can't/shouldn't change


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			As I've said previously I like your views on what a Scotland could look like....

As you're not aligned with SNP, do you think an independent Scotland would/could move away from them as the ruling party in time?  Or are the majority of yes voters more aligned to SNP than yourself and tied to them as the "way forward" do you think?
		
Click to expand...

I don't think that in the event of a YES vote the SNP would be voted as the party of power when the election comes around, they might become by default and novelty but I cannot see it long term.

What would they be called post YES?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			As much as I'd love an independent Scotland I cannot see anything the yes campaign have on offer which will come to fruition that would sway me to them, right now I'm in the NO camp.
		
Click to expand...

My advice would be ignore both the yes and no campaign.Whatever way Scotland goes in September we'll be financially viable, we'll be safe in our beds and the rain will fall in July.It's not about what the yes camp can offer to sway you, its about what Scottish folk can offer each other, about looking out for each other and taking a degree of pride in being represented and responsible for our actions, domestically and internationally.

I cannae wait.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I don't think that in the event of a YES vote the SNP would be voted as the party of power when the election comes around, they might become by default and novelty but I cannot see it long term.

What would they be called post YES?
		
Click to expand...

Who would be? Labour?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 18, 2014)

Just watched Patrick Harvie on the Kelso TV debate.
Totally agree with you Adi, Salmond should parachute him into his cabinet.
Decent show by Hosie for the SNP against some pretty hostile questioning.
Ruth Davidson always looks like she is sucking a lemon and the Labour MSP seemed totally out of her depth.
I cannot understand how the Tories and Labour seem to have given up any hope of power in Scotland. They could not even respond when asked by an audience member what they would do if they were in power after a yes vote

Looked like a 50/50 audience and a lively debate.


PS Patrick Harvie is Green


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If you're interested, Patrick Harvie would be the man I put in charge of Scotland tomorrow, the guy is head and shoulders above ANY politician in Scotland imo.
		
Click to expand...

Now that is something we can agree on. I do wonder if the yes campaign would fare better with Patrick in charge rather than the odious salmond. Fortunately we'll never find out!


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			My advice would be ignore both the yes and no campaign.Whatever way Scotland goes in September we'll be financially viable, we'll be safe in our beds and the rain will fall in July.It's not about what the yes camp can offer to sway you, its about what Scottish folk can offer each other, about looking out for each other and taking a degree of pride in being represented and responsible for our actions, domestically and internationally.

I cannae wait.
		
Click to expand...

I like your sentiment mate but it all appears to fantasy for my liking.


----------



## Val (Feb 18, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Who would be? Labour?
		
Click to expand...

Possibly, if they had a more charismatic leader I'd have said definately yes.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 18, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			As I've said previously I like your views on what a Scotland could look like....

As you're not aligned with SNP, do you think an independent Scotland would/could move away from them as the ruling party in time?  Or are the majority of yes voters more aligned to SNP than yourself and tied to them as the "way forward" do you think?
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where you live or what your politics are?But the SNP is a marriage of convenience, a rag tag group if small 'c' conservatives,liberal pro-business capitalists and some left leaning centreground merchants all under the same banner of nationalism...folk seem to forget the conservative party in Scotland, using PR, is actually quite well supported, esp in the borders/galloway and right up north.But they are different to the Conservative party in England, make no mistake.

But to answer your question, in my opinion,The SNP would skoosh any election post yes victory,then disintegrate with infighting...NATO being a biggie.I actually think Scottish Labour/Green would dominate in 10 years.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not sure where you live or what your politics are?But the SNP is a marriage of convenience, a rag tag group if small 'c' conservatives,liberal pro-business capitalists and some left leaning centreground merchants all under the same banner of nationalism...folk seem to forget the conservative party in Scotland, using PR, is actually quite well supported, esp in the borders/galloway and right up north.But they are different to the Conservative party in England, make no mistake.

But to answer your question, in my opinion,The SNP would skoosh any election post yes victory,then disintegrate with infighting...NATO being a biggie.I actually think Scottish Labour/Green would dominate in 10 years.
		
Click to expand...

Live in NW England, have done for 10 years hence me being out of touch! When I,left the SNP were on their jacksies, shows how quickly times change.........

My (less informed than it would be) view is that Salmond would actually brick himself if he woke up to a yes vote. He's always promised to deliver a referendum and his attempts to get "devo max" on the ballot paper betrayed him a little.

Your post about ignoring yes and no camps is probably the way to think about it, but we all know that the majority of the electorate will be swayed by what they read and see as part of the campaign......


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I want to live in a country that represents itself internationally, that elects people that reflects our society and make decisions for our benefit.Right now, and i'm sure no one would disagree,Scotland is not accurately reflected by Westminster politiking and with the dramatic change in Labour policy, we never will be again.
		
Click to expand...

I wonder how long it will be before the people of the Highlands start using the same argument about being accuratly reflected by the Scotish Parliament.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 19, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I wonder how long it will be before the people of the Highlands start using the same argument about being accuratly reflected by the Scotish Parliament.
		
Click to expand...

The Highlands have historically been a liberal stronghold so I think they would tend to go along with Adi's views.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			A nickname you say? Nor funny or pleasant
		
Click to expand...

On 'Jockanese' - I admit to using that as a term to describe my nationality - but I do so in a self-depracating way so rather taking the piss out of myself.  I'm not sure I really like being called Jockanese by others - but I grin and bear it.  And usually come up with some less than pithy response.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			On 'Jockanese' - I admit to using that as a term to describe my nationality - but I do so in a self-depracating way so rather taking the piss out of myself.  I'm not sure I really like being called Jockanese by others - but I grin and bear it.  And usually come up with some less than pithy response.
		
Click to expand...

...and as the discussion has hopefully finished - I'll conclude with my thoughts on being called a 'Jock'.  I used to dislike it because it didn't recognise the fact that I was a Weegie - but lumped me in with everyone else.  But these days - not really fussed as usually used in a friendly and 'jockular' (sorry) way - even although statements made to me starting 'you Jocks...' are often not always that complementary about us - but that's another matter altogether


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 19, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I wonder how long it will be before the people of the Highlands start using the same argument about being accuratly reflected by the Scotish Parliament.
		
Click to expand...

Becuase we use the democratically correct electoral procedure up here called Proportional Representation, everyone is fairly represented up here, something The UK could learn from.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Becuase we use the democratically correct electoral procedure up here called Proportional Representation, everyone is fairly represented up here, something The UK could learn from.
		
Click to expand...

Was that the same electoral procedure used in Eygpt.


----------



## EuanRoss (Feb 19, 2014)

Yes we have PR here but it's long been the feeling of people in the North that any money in Scotland doesn't go far beyond the central belt. Look how long it's taken for AWPR to get going. Christ, even the Edinburgh trams were done before then. The high speed rail link between Glasgow and Edinburgh was another central belt centric policy, what was it going to cut off journey times, 10 minutes or something, when there is a service every 15 minutes. Surely dualling the A9 should be another priority and the A96 is a disgrace as well.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Becuase we use the democratically correct electoral procedure up here called Proportional Representation, everyone is fairly represented up here, something The UK could learn from.
		
Click to expand...

H'mm. Unconvinced that PR is 'democratically correct'! Actually dead certain that it's not! It's merely a different method, with advantages and disadvantages compared to any other.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 19, 2014)

EuanRoss said:



			Yes we have PR here but it's long been the feeling of people in the North that any money in Scotland doesn't go far beyond the central belt. Look how long it's taken for AWPR to get going. Christ, even the Edinburgh trams were done before then. The high speed rail link between Glasgow and Edinburgh was another central belt centric policy, what was it going to cut off journey times, 10 minutes or something, when there is a service every 15 minutes. Surely dualling the A9 should be another priority and the A96 is a disgrace as well.
		
Click to expand...

I think you'll find not one human living in an EH postcode who disagrees with your assertion on the trams, Edinburghs new disgrace.As for the Aberdeen bypass, was that held up by a land owner or the route chosen?And the a9 dualing should be done before any other infrastructure project in Scotland, that road is a disgrace.


----------



## EuanRoss (Feb 19, 2014)

The A9 is shocking but the A96 is as bad, for a road that's supposed to link two cities. The A9 probably is the slightly worse of the two. 

I guess my point is that the central belt appears to get cash thrown at it regardless of whether things are needed or not. Any infrastructure project north of Stirling seems to be absolutely necessary and overdue by at least 20 years before consideration is even given to building it.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 19, 2014)

EuanRoss said:



			I guess my point is that the central belt appears to get cash thrown at it regardless of whether things are needed or not. Any infrastructure project north of Stirling seems to be absolutely necessary and overdue by at least 20 years before consideration is even given to building it.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not.The tram fiasco was the making of our council, before the govt had to step in and save it.I'm not aware of any high speed rail link getting the go ahead either?I've heard it discussed but nothing more?Maybe if Scotland had full powers of its 'economic levers', these projects would be done sooner....


----------



## lex! (Feb 19, 2014)

EuanRoss said:



			The A9 is shocking but the A96 is as bad, for a road that's supposed to link two cities. The A9 probably is the slightly worse of the two. 

I guess my point is that the central belt appears to get cash thrown at it regardless of whether things are needed or not. Any infrastructure project north of Stirling seems to be absolutely necessary and overdue by at least 20 years before consideration is even given to building it.
		
Click to expand...

Never mind all that! Luxury! You should see the Borders mate. We get NOTHING.


----------



## EuanRoss (Feb 19, 2014)

lex! said:



			Never mind all that! Luxury! You should see the Borders mate. We get NOTHING.
		
Click to expand...

Thats what you get for being so close to England.


----------



## lex! (Feb 19, 2014)

Yeah, the one shining light is that I will be able to nip across the border to get my tinnies after the joyless Salmond has ramped up the minimum alcohol pricing. Will have to join the queue at the Longtown Spa.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Just watched Patrick Harvie on the Kelso TV debate.
Totally agree with you Adi, Salmond should parachute him into his cabinet.
Decent show by Hosie for the SNP against some pretty hostile questioning.
Ruth Davidson always looks like she is sucking a lemon and the Labour MSP seemed totally out of her depth.
I cannot understand how the Tories and Labour seem to have given up any hope of power in Scotland. They could not even respond when asked by an audience member what they would do if they were in power after a yes vote

Looked like a 50/50 audience and a lively debate.


PS Patrick Harvie is Green
		
Click to expand...

Agree - Patrick Harvie is a good proponent of the YES argument - comes across well


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Maybe if Scotland had full powers of its 'economic levers', these projects would be done sooner....
		
Click to expand...

I see, its all the RUK fault that those North & South of the central belt are saying they feel they are being disadvantaged by the Scottish Parliament.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Maybe, maybe not.The tram fiasco was the making of our council, before the govt had to step in and save it.I'm not aware of any high speed rail link getting the go ahead either?I've heard it discussed but nothing more?Maybe if Scotland had full powers of its 'economic levers', these projects would be done sooner....
		
Click to expand...

Did anyone take responsibility for the horrendous cost of the Parliament?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Did anyone take responsibility for the horrendous cost of the Parliament?
		
Click to expand...

Seemed a not particularly unreasonable amount to spend on a nations parliament building - and one designed to last a bit longer than your average prefab.  And architecturally I think it is pretty splendid - exciting and adventurous.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Did anyone take responsibility for the horrendous cost of the Parliament?
		
Click to expand...

That will be RUK fault as we let them have their own Parliament and then gave them enough pockey money  to cock it all up.  Bit like the tram fiasco.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Seemed a not particularly unreasonable amount to spend on a nations parliament building - and one designed to last a bit longer than your average prefab.
		
Click to expand...

I presume your joking - fancy digging up the overspend costs on the project.


----------



## lex! (Feb 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Did anyone take responsibility for the horrendous cost of the Parliament?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, taxpayers in London and SE England.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 19, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I presume your joking - fancy digging up the overspend costs on the project.
		
Click to expand...

First you should ignore IMO the finger-in-the-air consultants initial Â£40m estimate that would have resulted in a ten storey Cold War days East European office block.  There was a very significant overspend - but the overspend was justified by those seeking a significant and lasting architectural statement.  And that is what Scotland has got.  I don't know how much it is costing each and everyone these days - but one a week-by-week basis I'm guessing that the cost overspend is not that significant an impact on the individual.  And it's there now and can't be _un-there'd_

And note that the Scottish parliament building isn't the only iconic or statement building that has been subject to massive overspend.  Try Sydney Opera House for one.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Seemed a not particularly unreasonable amount to spend on a nations parliament building - and one designed to last a bit longer than your average prefab.  And architecturally I think it is pretty splendid - exciting and adventurous.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:

The, slightly smaller, Welsh Assembly cost less than 20% of the Scottish one - and there was serious criticism of the excessive cost of that too!


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And note that the Scottish parliament building isn't the only iconic or statement building that has been subject to massive overspend.  Try Sydney Opera House for one.
		
Click to expand...

The Sydney Opera House did not come out of my pocket money or other UK taxpayers.

Finger in the air estimates, you don't work in the public sector do you. When public money is involved are you happy that those responsible for the Scottish Parliament relied on finger in the air estimates.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 19, 2014)

If we're going to discuss obscene over spend by govt it's only fair to bring Olympics,refurb of Westminster or channel tunnel into the equation....


----------



## USER1999 (Feb 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If we're going to discuss obscene over spend by govt it's only fair to bring Olympics,refurb of Westminster or channel tunnel into the equation....
		
Click to expand...

What about the dome?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 19, 2014)

murphthemog said:



			What about the dome?
		
Click to expand...

Which was sold on to O2 and is currently still being used 

As is the Olympic Park and the highly successful Channel Tunnel


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 19, 2014)

No argument about the horrific poor management of public funds just the response from SLH.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			First you should ignore IMO the finger-in-the-air consultants initial Â£40m estimate that would have resulted in a ten storey Cold War days East European office block.  There was a very significant overspend - but the overspend was justified by those seeking a significant and lasting architectural statement.  And that is what Scotland has got.  I don't know how much it is costing each and everyone these days - but one a week-by-week basis I'm guessing that the cost overspend is not that significant an impact on the individual.  And it's there now and can't be _un-there'd_

And note that the Scottish parliament building isn't the only iconic or statement building that has been subject to massive overspend.  Try Sydney Opera House for one.
		
Click to expand...

Did we pay for the Sydney Opera house? didn't know that.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 19, 2014)

All I am saying is that it is not unusual for significant and 'statement' building projects to go well over budget.  Besides - it is built.  You can either accept that the budget for it was significantly overspent or let it bug you.  I don't expect there to be too many public building projects happening in the near future on the scale or importance of the Holyrood parliament buildings.  I blame the politicians who let it happen.  

I'm not sure of the business case for the Edinburgh tram system - and as I understand it - certainly unsure that one could be made for what has now been built.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			All I am saying is that it is not unusual for significant and 'statement' building projects to go well over budget.  Besides - it is built.  You can either accept that the budget for it was significantly overspent or let it bug you.  I don't expect there to be too many public building projects happening in the near future on the scale or importance of the Holyrood parliament buildings.  I blame the politicians who let it happen.  

I'm not sure of the business case for the Edinburgh tram system - and as I understand it - certainly unsure that one could be made for what has now been built.
		
Click to expand...

The very simple facts of the matter are that it was a scandalously mis-managed project.  To open 3 years late is bad enough; to cost over 10 times the initial estimate shows criminal levels of inefficiency.
It looks crap, a 60s Eastern Block style building would have done the job; it's a parliament building, the important bit is what happens inside, not how it looks as a tourist photo backdrop.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If we're going to discuss obscene over spend by govt it's only fair to bring Olympics,refurb of Westminster or channel tunnel into the equation....
		
Click to expand...

Olympic overspend? Surely not!  That supposedly came in 'under budget'! :rofl: It did make a 'profit' though!  

The scariest thing about the Scottish Parliament was that way MSPs actually voted to simply remove the Â£195M cap - effectively saying 'build it, irrespective of the cost'!

@Stevie_R As SILH posted, the Â£40M was finger in the air stuff. First 'official' budget was Â£109M - still huge and only 25% of the final amount.

It does cost something approaching 500k/year to clean the building and windows too!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			The scariest thing about the Scottish Parliament was that way MSPs actually voted to simply remove the Â£195M cap - effectively saying 'build it, irrespective of the cost'!
		
Click to expand...

I agree with that sentiment fully. But it's built - and whether you like it or not is simply opinion.  I guess not many on here will like 'brutalist' and 'modernist' architecture - as it happens I do like a lot of what many would have pulled down - though opinion is moving towards keeping it these days (see Preston Bus Station as a recent example 'saved' from demolition).

It is not so long ago that anything Victorian/Gothic looking was detested and hauled down whenever possible - the most scandalous in Glasgow IMO being the YMCA building in Bothwell Street and St Enoch Station and Hotel (for the UK MoD move which was never going to happen).

Maybe a new Scottish modern vernacular style will emerge in the coming decades that doesn't mimic crow-stepped gables and fortified tower houses.


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 19, 2014)

Puzzling... All the massive overspends on government I.T. projects seem to have [conveniently] not been mentioned... All of you 'work' in I.T.?


----------



## lex! (Feb 19, 2014)

OK, spent far too much money on it but it's a great looking building IMO. Very eye catching, I really admire it when I go past. Big draw for Edinburgh tourists too.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I agree with that sentiment fully. But it's built - and whether you like it or not is simply opinion.
		
Click to expand...

It's nothing to do with the architecture! I'm neutral on that - some good, some not so good imo. It's the irresponsibility I object to - in the same way as I did with the original Millenium Dome plan - Â£600M to build (plus Â£200M overrun), then pull down 1 year later! 

There's a desk (for 6) in Holyrood that cost 88k! What?!



MegaSteve said:



			Puzzling... All the massive overspends on government I.T. projects seem to have [conveniently] not been mentioned... All of you 'work' in I.T.?
		
Click to expand...

Yep. Those are the biggest of the lot! And far less visible!

The NHS (existing past and future) ones being right up there as the worst examples! Though there are plenty of others too!

Anyway....Back to the proper use of the building - for Governing Scotland, devolved or independently!


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Anyway....Back to the proper use of the building - for Governing Scotland, devolved or independently!
		
Click to expand...

If Independence happens the first thing that will happen is some politician will declare it's not big enough.


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Olympic overspend? Surely not!  That supposedly came in 'under budget'! :rofl: It did make a 'profit' though!  

The scariest thing about the Scottish Parliament was that way MSPs actually voted to simply remove the Â£195M cap - effectively saying 'build it, irrespective of the cost'!

@Stevie_R As SILH posted, the Â£40M was finger in the air stuff. First 'official' budget was Â£109M - *still huge and only 25% of the final amount.*

It does cost something approaching 500k/year to clean the building and windows too!
		
Click to expand...

Well that's ok then.

It still looks hideous.  Tourist attraction? not really, people travelling from overseas might give it a quick look but I doubt it serves to attract anyone to travel to Edinburgh.  I would be amazed if it has had any affect of tourism figures at all.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 19, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Well that's ok then.

It still looks hideous.  Tourist attraction? not really, people travelling from overseas might give it a quick look but I doubt it serves to attract anyone to travel to Edinburgh.  I would be amazed if it has had any affect of tourism figures at all.
		
Click to expand...

It is certainly always hoaching with tourists around there although I suspect Holyrood (across the road) is the bigger draw.


----------



## lex! (Feb 19, 2014)

It IS very much a tourist attraction in the city, in a superb setting.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 19, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Puzzling... All the massive overspends on government I.T. projects seem to have [conveniently] not been mentioned... All of you 'work' in I.T.?
		
Click to expand...

The problem with government IT projects is more often that not due to moving goalposts.  The suppler signs up to deliver one thing but the process takes so long that by the time they get going the requirements change and so cost start escalating - and so on it goes with a government or departmental expert appearing out of every nook and cranny proclaiming to be a key stakeholder and to be consulted - and so it goes on.

Some IT projects work pretty well though.  Government Gateway for one - on 30/31st January of each year it is - with the HMRC Tax SA website - one of the most heavily used transactions websites in the world - and tends to keep going under the strain.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 19, 2014)

The Scottish parliament building is a solid bit of kit (except for those pesky leaking window seat thingmys) and I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder.I'd have gone for a refit of Donaldsons in the west end and kept the Royal High on Calton hill as the second chamber of any bicameral govt.

Donaldsons has to be the nicest building in all of Edinburgh


----------



## lex! (Feb 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Donaldsons has to be the nicest building in all of Edinburgh
		
Click to expand...

For me, it has to be Fettes College

(where tony blair learnt how to be a socialist)


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 19, 2014)

lex! said:



			For me, it has to be Fettes College

(where tony blair learnt how to be a socialist)
		
Click to expand...

Good shout.I just like how Donaldsons sits almost 'welcoming' folk into the city centre.


----------



## lex! (Feb 19, 2014)

No doubt, Donaldsons is a fabulous sight.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The problem with government IT projects is more often that not due to moving goalposts.  The suppler signs up to deliver one thing but the process takes so long that by the time they get going the requirements change and so cost start escalating - and so on it goes with a government or departmental expert appearing out of every nook and cranny proclaiming to be a key stakeholder and to be consulted - and so it goes on.
		
Click to expand...

Certainly agree about the moving goalposts and stakeholders! That's why National Health IT Systems (worldwide!) are fraught with risk! There's a rule of thumb that any IT project (in Government or elsewhere) that takes > 6 months has a 50% chance of failure; and any that takes more than a year is 'bound to fail' - though I've seen some notable exceptions!



SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Some IT projects work pretty well though.  Government Gateway for one - on 30/31st January of each year it is - with the HMRC Tax SA website - one of the most heavily used transactions websites in the world - and tends to keep going under the strain.
		
Click to expand...

There's a difference between a system working well - or at least appearing to - and the development (and ongoing) cost being effective!

There's no way that the Government Gateway project can either be justified (or not) because the costs and benefits have not been measured! And that's from a National Audit report on it. Here's a couple of quotes.

Read Paras 21 and 22 of this summary of that project. http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/n10121589es.pdf

And there are plenty of higher transaction rates than the Self Assessment one - which was very dodgy initially (some years ago)!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 19, 2014)

lex! said:



			Yeah, the one shining light is that I will be able to nip across the border to get my tinnies after the joyless Salmond has ramped up the minimum alcohol pricing. Will have to join the queue at the Longtown Spa.
		
Click to expand...

The only drink the minimum price will hit is Buckfast and white cider.
Thankfully the 3 for a tenner wines were hit by the excellent multi drinks promotion law.
Tidied up the supermarket isles as well.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Tidied up the supermarket *isles *as well.
		
Click to expand...

:whoo:

Easily amused today!


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 19, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It is certainly always hoaching with tourists around there although I suspect Holyrood (across the road) is the bigger draw.
		
Click to expand...

Is no doubt the correct answer.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			:whoo:

Easily amused today!

Click to expand...

oops!


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



*The only drink the minimum price will hit is Buckfast and white cider.*
Thankfully the 3 for a tenner wines were hit by the excellent multi drinks promotion law.
Tidied up the supermarket isles as well.
		
Click to expand...

That's probably not strictly true tbh


----------



## lex! (Feb 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The only drink the minimum price will hit is Buckfast and white cider.
		
Click to expand...

What?! That's my cocktail of choice. Has the big man got something personal against me?


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 19, 2014)

I have a problem with minimum pricing for units of alcohol.  There are a significant number of households in Scotland, with small children, where alcohol is the priority.  Raising the price won't alter that priority, it will simply mean less available cash to provide a decent standard of care for the child.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The problem with government IT projects is more often that not due to moving goalposts.  The suppler signs up to deliver one thing but the process takes so long that by the time they get going the requirements change and so cost start escalating - and so on it goes with a government or departmental expert appearing out of every nook and cranny proclaiming to be a key stakeholder and to be consulted - and so it goes on.

Some IT projects work pretty well though.  Government Gateway for one - on 30/31st January of each year it is - with the HMRC Tax SA website - one of the most heavily used transactions websites in the world - and tends to keep going under the strain.
		
Click to expand...

The Government Gateway processed about 600k transactions on 31st Jan but although that's alot, it is in a different solar system to genuinely worldwide systems which process large volumes of transactions every single day.

For example, PayPal get thru over 9 million transactions per day and VISA 47 thousand transactions per second every single day of the year all year round.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 19, 2014)

lex! said:



			For me, it has to be Fettes College

(where tony blair learnt how to be a socialist)
		
Click to expand...

A pseudo-french chateau confection.  Talking fancy pants Edinburgh school buildings I rather prefer Donaldson's College.  But I don;t really know Embra architecture


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			A pseudo-french chateau confection.  Talking fancy pants Edinburgh school buildings I rather prefer Donaldson's College.  But I don;t really know Embra architecture
		
Click to expand...

Isn't that 'faux-French'?

National Gallery Building still easiest on the eye. though this one is my 'favourite'! http://www.fishersbistros.co.uk/fishers-in-the-city.php

:thup:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Isn't that 'faux-French'?
		
Click to expand...

je nessie pa...

And I agree - The National Gallery is a very classy (or should that be neoclassical) piece of architecture


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 19, 2014)

Lot of time for this one too!

https://plus.google.com/117709173950855712810/photos/photo/5817434453211319314

Especially like the ceilings and there are a couple of other's with similar adornments - The Guildford being a favourite for Pale Ales! Check the ceiling in the main pic! http://www.guildfordarms.com/


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 19, 2014)

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=r...CKInR7Aani4CIBA&ved=0CDAQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=618

One of my favourite Scottish buildings


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=r...CKInR7Aani4CIBA&ved=0CDAQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=618

One of my favourite Scottish buildings
		
Click to expand...

They are indeed magnificent, had a decent scrub there once while sailing :thup:


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 19, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			They are indeed magnificent, had a decent scrub there once *while sailing* :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Is that what they call it now


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 20, 2014)

That's the clincher then.......... David Bowie wants us to stay.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That's the clincher then.......... David Bowie wants us to stay.
		
Click to expand...

I hear Beyonce's people are drafting a statement...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 20, 2014)

It'll be his Scottish heritage - and I'm sure I saw him wear tartan once.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 20, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I hear Beyonce's people are drafting a statement...
		
Click to expand...

that would probably be a bum steer


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That's the clincher then.......... David Bowie wants us to stay.
		
Click to expand...

Love Bowie, maybe my favourite musician ever.And I love my musicians to be politically 'turned on', but the lad lives in Tribeca NYC or Munich...he hasn't paid taxes in the UK since 1976 for christ sake!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Love Bowie, maybe my favourite musician ever.And I love my musicians to be politically 'turned on', but the lad lives in Tribeca NYC or Munich...he hasn't paid taxes in the UK since 1976 for christ sake!
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps Blair rung him up and offered advice.


----------



## lex! (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Love Bowie, maybe my favourite musician ever.And I love my musicians to be politically 'turned on', but the lad lives in Tribeca NYC or Munich...he hasn't paid taxes in the UK since 1976 for christ sake!
		
Click to expand...

Just like Sean Connery


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 20, 2014)

lex! said:



			Just like Sean Connery
		
Click to expand...

Correct.Thankfully Connery hasn't uttered a word on this for years.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Love Bowie, maybe my favourite musician ever.And I love my musicians to be politically 'turned on', but the lad lives in Tribeca NYC or Munich...he hasn't paid taxes in the UK since 1976 for christ sake!
		
Click to expand...

So as much right to comment as "Swings it like Hogan" then!  :whoo:


----------



## stevie_r (Feb 20, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Is that what they call it now 

Click to expand...

Tut tut, honest guv


----------



## Fish (Feb 20, 2014)

I reckon you should have these.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			No.I'm only looking for a YES victory, nothing more.I have an opinion on currency/Europe/Nato/welfare/defence etc, and very little is in common with The SNP, but in reality, it's all window dressing, all transient jam tomorrow stuff that in the grand scheme of Nation building is unimportant.

I want to live in a country that represents itself internationally, that elects people that reflects our society and make decisions for our benefit.Right now, and i'm sure no one would disagree,Scotland is not accurately reflected by Westminster politiking and with the dramatic change in Labour policy, we never will be again.

If you're interested, Patrick Harvie would be the man I put in charge of Scotland tomorrow, the guy is head and shoulders above ANY politician in Scotland imo.
		
Click to expand...

I rarely agree with your direct expression of your sentiments but you've gone up in my estimation. Spoken from the heart without all the "what's in it for me" rubbish. 

I totally agree that independance and self-determination should have nowt to do with finance.

P.S. can I live your side of the wall?


----------



## Rumpokid (Feb 20, 2014)

Hee Hee,good one.



Fish said:



			I reckon you should have these.

View attachment 9228

Click to expand...


----------



## chrisd (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I want to live in a country that represents itself internationally, that elects people that reflects our society and make decisions for our benefit.Right now, and i'm sure no one would disagree,Scotland is not accurately reflected by Westminster politiking and with the dramatic change in Labour policy, we never will be again.
		
Click to expand...

I think that I'd like that for us down here too, for the same reasons.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 20, 2014)

Rumpokid said:



			Hee Hee,good one.
		
Click to expand...

As much chance of getting those accepted for payment South of Preston as the ligit ones?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 20, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			I rarely agree with your direct expression of your sentiments but you've gone up in my estimation. Spoken from the heart without all the "what's in it for me" rubbish. 

I totally agree that independance and self-determination should have nowt to do with finance.

P.S. can I live your side of the wall?
		
Click to expand...

It's often been said I'm too abrasive and I should possibly tone down my 'directfulness' as it's often seen as a negative to my cheery disposition.I think my character could be described as stereotypical Scot, without the reluctance to put his hand in his sporran.

And you'd be more than welcome to live in Scotland any time you want..as long as you support with finances, Hibernian.



chrisd said:



			I think that I'd like that for us down here too, for the same reasons.
		
Click to expand...

Yup.I think there are many folk in England looking for the same ideas I have for Scotland...there is poverty in England, food banks and folk living on hand outs.And they have my sympathy for the sorry state they've been left in by Westminster.But Scotland has the opportunity to remove itself from all that, cities in England don't and I can't see any way their situation will change...unless they move to iScotland.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 20, 2014)

Sir Alex congratulated the British curlers at the Scottish Parliament and said that it goes to prove that 'we can all be heros for just one day'.

Quite a few folk on the 'phone ins' seem to think that the Chancellors intervention on the currency last week has filtered down to a boost for the yes vote.


----------



## lex! (Feb 20, 2014)

I agree with these heart felt wishes but the big worry is self-determination in the hands of the SNP. They cannot be trusted not to embark on spending spree on social policies that will be underpinned by borrowed money. In the end, mr and mrs average, goes out to work, tax payer will be asked to cough up more to pay it back. Also corporates, when business rates are already punitive, and that is why some are already threatening to leave.


----------



## CMAC (Feb 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Sir Alex congratulated the British curlers at the Scottish Parliament and said that it goes to prove that 'we can all be heros for just one day'.

Quite a few folk on the 'phone ins' seem to think that the Chancellors intervention on the currency last week has filtered down to a boost for the yes vote.
		
Click to expand...

I heard the exact antithesis as they want to keep the pound- by all accounts many 'unsures' are now sure.

I seriously worry for us as a nation if we all start abandoning each other. Be different, be unique, but do it together.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 20, 2014)

lex! said:



			I agree with these heart felt wishes but the big worry is self-determination in the hands of the SNP. They cannot be trusted not to embark on spending spree on social policies that will be underpinned by borrowed money. In the end, mr and mrs average, goes out to work, tax payer will be asked to cough up more to pay it back. Also corporates, when business rates are already punitive, and that is why some are already threatening to leave.
		
Click to expand...

Swinney has balanced his budget every single year, he's never ran a deficit I think?I'm no fan of The SNP, but we need to stick to facts if folk are going to make up their mind.

FACT:SNP will not be the defacto govt of iScotland post Yes...we'll have an election
FACT:SNP have balanced the budget under severe financial constraints every year they've been in power

A spending spree on social policies instead of contributing to white elephant vanity projects would be most welcome in Scotland.And everyone has a go at Salmond the 'failed economist'...his CV in Economics is mightily more impressive than Osbournes.

Business Rates are set by local councils, I'm lucky to qualify for the small business rates relief policy in Edinburgh...if you mean Corporation Tax(?) The SNP have suggested they'd cut Corp tax to a level lower than rUK...if you could direct me to any business who has claimed they'd leave iScotland ( not the myth peddled by media/policitians) I'd appreciate it...


----------



## One Planer (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Swinney has balanced his budget every single year, he's never ran a deficit I think?I'm no fan of The SNP, but we need to stick to facts if folk are going to make up their mind.

FACT:SNP will not be the defacto govt of iScotland post Yes...we'll have an election
FACT:SNP have balanced the budget under severe financial constraints every year they've been in power

A spending spree on social policies instead of contributing to white elephant vanity projects would be most welcome in Scotland.And everyone has a go at Salmond the 'failed economist'...his CV in Economics is mightily more impressive than Osbournes.

Business Rates are set by local councils, I'm lucky to qualify for the small business rates relief policy in Edinburgh...if you mean Corporation Tax(?) The SNP have suggested they'd cut Corp tax to a level lower than rUK...if you could direct me to any business who has claimed they'd leave iScotland ( not the myth peddled by media/policitians) I'd appreciate it...
		
Click to expand...

Didn't BP mention something a while back?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 20, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Didn't BP mention something a while back?
		
Click to expand...

Nope.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26028481


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			if you could direct me to any business who has claimed they'd leave iScotland ( not the myth peddled by media/policitians) I'd appreciate it...
		
Click to expand...

Rangers and Celtic?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 20, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I heard the exact antithesis as they want to keep the pound- by all accounts many 'unsures' are now sure.

I seriously worry for us as a nation if we all start abandoning each other. Be different, be unique, but do it together.
		
Click to expand...

I think the result that would be most damaging would be a close vote for either side. 
I cannot see the yes vote running away with it, so a Yes result by a narrow margin would be awful for Scotland.
The No vote appears to have stalled and there also seems to be many Scots who are still undecided. 

Anything between 40 to 49% for a yes vote will still cause division.
The No vote must reach 65% to be credible.


----------



## Imurg (Feb 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think the result that would be most damaging would be a close vote for either side. 
I cannot see the yes vote running away with it, so a Yes result by a narrow margin would be awful for Scotland.
The No vote appears to have stalled and there also seems to be many Scots who are still undecided. 

Anything between 40 to 49% for a yes vote will still cause division.
The No vote must reach 65% to be credible.
		
Click to expand...


What would the Yes vote need to reach to be credible..?
The same I would hope..


----------



## lex! (Feb 20, 2014)

and whats he ganna do when the oil runs ooot ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 20, 2014)

lex! said:



			and whats he ganna do when the oil runs ooot ?
		
Click to expand...

Oil schmoil.We've got wind,tide,wave,hydro.We're all about the renewables.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 20, 2014)

Imurg said:



			What would the Yes vote need to reach to be credible..?
The same I would hope..
		
Click to expand...

As the No vote is the status quo I would think 55-60% is acceptable.
Less than 55%  for the yes vote would make it difficult for Salmond to proceed.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 20, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			So as much right to comment as "Swings it like Hogan" then!  :whoo: 

Click to expand...

I am a mere bystander making my observations on the goings on.  An outsider with little or no interest in the proceedings other than to form an opinion that enables me to partake of an informed discussion with my mother, brother, sister, sister and brother in-laws, nephews, nieces, aunts, uncles, 14 cousins and multitudinous second cousins - all of whom DO have a vote and who have and may well also ask my opinion - as an outsider looking in.   But of course it won't affect me.  I remain serene.


----------



## CMAC (Feb 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



*I think the result that would be most damaging would be a close vote for either side. *
I cannot see the yes vote running away with it, so a Yes result by a narrow margin would be awful for Scotland.
The No vote appears to have stalled and there also seems to be many Scots who are still undecided. 

Anything between 40 to 49% for a yes vote will still cause division.
The No vote must reach 65% to be credible.
		
Click to expand...

yes I would agree with that. I'd like to see a very strong 75%+ shouting no!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Oil schmoil.We've got wind,tide,wave,hydro.We're all about the renewables.
		
Click to expand...


Shame most of them arent financially viable at the moment - especially tide,wave and hydro.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 20, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Shame most of them arent financially viable at the moment - especially tide,wave and hydro.
		
Click to expand...

You're being too kind on wind but I do think the hydro schemes are pretty viable....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think the result that would be most damaging would be a close vote for either side. 
I cannot see the yes vote running away with it, so a Yes result by a narrow margin would be awful for Scotland.
The No vote appears to have stalled and there also seems to be many Scots who are still undecided. 

Anything between 40 to 49% for a yes vote will still cause division.
The No vote must reach 65% to be credible.
		
Click to expand...

Ah see - my point all along was that in the event of a close vote either way it would indeed be 'not good' this is where the diaspora would have come in handy - looking wider that local interest to those of us with a broader and different perspective on things.  

Maybe not to change the vote but if the diaspora voted NO in a big way then that would give added something to a narrow No by the electorate - and vice versa.  Dunno.  Just think there could have been value in some way seeking the disapora view even if it didn't actually count in the vote itself - though I still maintain something like 90% weight given to the home vote and 10% weight to the diaspora would have been good - would certainly not have alienated such as myself.  So if there are 800,000 of us (apparently a number like that however they reach it) - then 80,000 votes up for grabs.  But no - it isn't happening so I accept the state of affiars as they are - and remain serene


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 20, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			You're being too kind on wind but I do think the hydro schemes are pretty viable....
		
Click to expand...


Think the idea is great but it's finding material cheap enough but good enough last and won't get battered by the water. 

It is certainly a race for the first company to make it work


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 20, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Think the idea is great but it's finding material cheap enough but good enough last and won't get battered by the water. 

It is certainly a race for the first company to make it work
		
Click to expand...

We've had working hydro schemes for decades?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			As the No vote is the status quo I would think 55-60% is acceptable.
Less than 55%  for the yes vote would make it difficult for Salmond to proceed.
		
Click to expand...

50% + 1 vote will be enough for either side.The Edinburgh Agreement dictates ANY majority is legally binding.



CMAC said:



			yes I would agree with that. I'd like to see a very strong 75%+ shouting no!
		
Click to expand...

Prepare to be disappointed then.This'll be as tight as a gnats chuff.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 20, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Shame most of them arent financially viable at the moment - especially tide,wave and hydro.
		
Click to expand...

I find them more financially viable than paying French govt owned companies billions of Â£ to build nuclear reactors, then subsidising the product for years.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I find them more financially viable than paying French govt owned companies billions of Â£ to build nuclear reactors, then subsidising the product for years.
		
Click to expand...

...and 20-25yrs time technologies will have matured.  That said - Whitelees Wind Farm (all 215 turbines of it) near home in Glasgow isn't really that much of a blot on the landscape - that whole area of moorland was pretty unused and desolate in any case.  And I haven't actually heard that many dissenting voices about it.  Maybe they are just not being heard.  Generates enough power for 300,000 homes.  Simple sums suggests that you don't need that many Whitelees Wind Farms to power Scotland.  Maybe it's *not *that simple.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 20, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			We've had working hydro schemes for decades? 

Click to expand...

Do you mean the dam schemes around the world ?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I find them more financially viable than paying French govt owned companies billions of Â£ to build nuclear reactors, then subsidising the product for years.
		
Click to expand...

I wouldnt be so sure about that. Certainly not able to produce the levels of power required.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 20, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Do you mean the dam schemes around the world ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, that's hydro-electricty - many examples in Scotland, the most famous probably being at Ben Cruachan.


----------



## lex! (Feb 20, 2014)

The existing wind turbines are a disgusting blight on the Borders landscape. I am opposed to any more.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I find them more financially viable than paying French govt owned companies billions of Â£ to build nuclear reactors, then subsidising the product for years.
		
Click to expand...

Arguably. Still, it'd be nice to have the lights on during those calmer evenings.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 20, 2014)

lex! said:



			The existing wind turbines are a disgusting blight on the Borders landscape. I am opposed to any more.
		
Click to expand...

Your opinion is certainly one that alot of folk agree with.Personally, I like them, find them very relaxing to watch, but I know it's caused issues near my but n ben near kirkcudbright and the solway firth where folk think they're too close to land, or near Moffat where they're removed 100's of acres of land to accomodate huge arrays.

norway might have the right solution...they're off shore ones have to be a certain distance from the shore, naked to the visible eye.Makes it more pricey to bring ashore, but a reasonable compromise.

In Leith there is a competition being ran for local communities to win the chance to erect and run their own turbine beside the sewage plant at Seafield, it's been very popular


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Your opinion is certainly one that alot of folk agree with.Personally, I like them, find them very relaxing to watch, but I know it's caused issues near my but n ben near kirkcudbright and the solway firth where folk think they're too close to land, or near Moffat where they're removed 100's of acres of land to accomodate huge arrays.

norway might have the right solution...they're off shore ones have to be a certain distance from the shore, naked to the visible eye.Makes it more pricey to bring ashore, but a reasonable compromise.

In Leith there is a competition being ran for local communities to win the chance to erect and run their own turbine beside the sewage plant at Seafield, it's been very popular
		
Click to expand...

I think locating the wind turbines is the main issue. Down at seafield - no problem - but I am pretty fed up seeing all this industrial kit cropping up all round the countryside.


----------



## lex! (Feb 20, 2014)

I was shocked when I saw the plans for Lauder, complete disregard for the aspect, whilst villagers are offered sweeteners for other local improvements.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 20, 2014)

Loved the reasons Scottish Power gave for abandoning the Tiree Wind Array.

1) More baskings sharks and breeding ground than they expected
2) The seabed rock was very hard (didn't Stevenson discover that when building Skerryvore lighthouse in mid 19th Century?)
3) The sea was rougher than they expected - it's the bleedin' Atlantic and Tiree is the windiest place in the UK


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 20, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Tiree is the windiest place in the UK
		
Click to expand...

And also the sunniest, allegedly (can't say I noticed that personally)! Great place to go to drop off the planet for a week or two!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 20, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			And also the sunniest, allegedly (can't say I noticed that personally)! Great place to go to drop off the planet for a week or two!
		
Click to expand...

It has most hours of sunshine in late May early June.  I've had many and some fantastic holidays out there - my father is from the island - and I take my mind to a quiet spot on a headland near my uncle's croft when I need to put myself in a place of serenity and peace.  We all need one of these places.


----------



## Val (Feb 20, 2014)

Going back to Scottish businesses and how it will effect their businesses, I know of 2 businesses who both turn over in excess of Â£100m and are firmly in the no camp but cannot publicly show their hand as it would have a detrimental effect on their business right now


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 20, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Going back to Scottish businesses and how it will effect their businesses, I know of 2 businesses who both turn over in excess of Â£100m and are firmly in the no camp but cannot publicly show their hand as it would have a detrimental effect on their business right now
		
Click to expand...

I see RBS has placed TSB into an English holding company now aswell.  Although this is more to do with the IPO and investors (confirmed) uncertainty of investment if it remained a Scottish company due to lack of clarity about what would happen give a Yes vote.


----------



## Val (Feb 20, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			I see RBS has placed TSB into an English holding company now aswell.  Although this is more to do with the IPO and investors (confirmed) uncertainty of investment if it remained a Scottish company due to lack of clarity about what would happen give a Yes vote.
		
Click to expand...

I think there will be lots of this going on


----------



## ger147 (Feb 20, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			I see RBS has placed TSB into an English holding company now aswell.  Although this is more to do with the IPO and investors (confirmed) uncertainty of investment if it remained a Scottish company due to lack of clarity about what would happen give a Yes vote.
		
Click to expand...

RBS doesn't own TSB, Lloyds does and it has been registered in England as the current holding company within the current Lloyds structure that holds TSB is also registered in England.

Nowt to do with the impending Yes/No vote up here.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 20, 2014)

ger147 said:



			RBS doesn't own TSB, Lloyds does and it has been registered in England as the current holding company within the current Lloyds structure that holds TSB is also registered in England.

Nowt to do with the impending Yes/No vote up here.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, Lloyds not RBS.

According to the Telegraph today this is a new move based on the uncertainty a Yes vote would bring in terms of the sale of TSB?  TSB, as it stands, is a Scottish registered subsidiary I think.

I read it at 5am on a train this morning so may have missed some other points right enough....


----------



## ger147 (Feb 20, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Sorry, Lloyds not RBS.

According to the Telegraph today this is a new move based on the uncertainty a Yes vote would bring in terms of the sale of TSB?  TSB, as it stands, is a Scottish registered subsidiary I think.

I read it at 5am on a train this morning so may have missed some other points right enough....
		
Click to expand...

The current TSB holding company within Lloyds corporate structure is registered in England but TSB is licenced to be a bank in Scotland.

The new arrangement will be identical.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 20, 2014)

ger147 said:



			The current TSB holding company within Lloyds corporate structure is registered in England but TSB is licenced to be a bank in Scotland.

The new arrangement will be identical.
		
Click to expand...


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...e-TSB-in-England-as-Scottish-fears-mount.html

Seems it is a change to both Lloyds and TSB.

Should have just posted this link originally,

Pertinent paragraph....

It is a marked change from TSBâ€™s current ownership structure. Both TSB Bank plc, in which the bank itself sits, and Lloyds Banking Group plc, are incorporated in Scotland.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 20, 2014)

NWJocko said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...e-TSB-in-England-as-Scottish-fears-mount.html

Seems it is a change to both Lloyds and TSB.

Should have just posted this link originally!
		
Click to expand...

Neither of those companies are the holding company for TSB, which is currently registered in England as the new one will be.

I work in Banking and have done for many years.  Trust me, no change.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/feb/20/lloyds-holding-company-tsb-bank-float


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 20, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Neither of those companies are the holding company for TSB, which is currently registered in England as the new one will be.

I work in Banking and have done for many years.  Trust me, no change.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/feb/20/lloyds-holding-company-tsb-bank-float

Click to expand...

So do, and so have I 

Lloyds are selling a stake in TSB so the parent company has no bearing.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 20, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			So do, and so have I 

Lloyds are selling a stake in TSB so the parent company has no bearing.
		
Click to expand...

And it's the new holding company that is being registered in England, not TSB itself.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 20, 2014)

ger147 said:



			And it's the new holding company that is being registered in England, not TSB itself.
		
Click to expand...

The holding company for TSB, which is currently registered in Scotland.

The IPO is for TSB directly, not for Lloyds (whichever vehicle they use to hold TSB, although even that has moved)

Have you read the article?


----------



## ger147 (Feb 20, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			The holding company for TSB, which is currently registered in Scotland.

The IPO is for TSB directly, not for Lloyds (whichever vehicle they use to hold TSB, although even that has moved)

Have you read the article?
		
Click to expand...

Have you read the Guardian article:

"The new holding company â€“ TSB Banking Group plc â€“ is based in England and Wales, which may disappoint those who had hoped it would be registered in Scotland, the traditional base of the bank.

However, as a result of the complex structure of banks, the holding company replaces one that was already registered in England. The arm through which customers actually conduct their business, TSB Bank plc, will continue to be licensed in Scotland."


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 20, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Have you read the Guardian article:

"The new holding company â€“ TSB Banking Group plc â€“ is based in England and Wales, which may disappoint those who had hoped it would be registered in Scotland, the traditional base of the bank.

However, as a result of the complex structure of banks, the holding company replaces one that was already registered in England. The arm through which customers actually conduct their business, TSB Bank plc, will continue to be licensed in Scotland."

Click to expand...

To be honest I try not to read the guardian!

Interesting as they have completely different takes on it.....


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 20, 2014)

The movement away from Scotland is only inference and opinion imo. 

Torygraph and Daily Muck are spinning their own agendas on this one! In this case, Guardian article (unusually) appears to be much more in line with my view of responsible reporting - simply reporting - whereas Torygraph and DM have also told us what to think! Torygraph omits the paragraph about the existing structure, as it's at odds with their view.

 Comparing different Newspapers articles (and headlines) on the same item/incident is always fun!

It would make sense for Lloyds to choose England/Wales as a place to register any company designed to support the IPO/Sale, purely to eliminate any uncertainty that the referendum has introduced.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 21, 2014)

RBS to shed another 30,000 jobs.
There can't be many left now?


----------



## ger147 (Feb 21, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			RBS to shed another 30,000 jobs.There can't be many left now?
		
Click to expand...

Must be a fun place to work at the moment.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 21, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			RBS to shed another 30,000 jobs.
There can't be many left now?
		
Click to expand...

Another classic piece of Media Headlining!

There's a bit of a difference between making 30k people redundant (what the papers imply) and selling businesses that employ 30k people - much more like reality!

And it's really just a consequence of 'down-sizing' - another PR term!

There'll still be almost 100k employees (worldwide).


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 21, 2014)

Read yesterday from Danny Alexander that mortgage repayments might soar following a YES...

Yes - they might - and they might not.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 21, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Read yesterday from Danny Alexander that mortgage repayments might soar following a YES...

Yes - they might - and they might not.
		
Click to expand...

Another quote taken rather 'out of context'. That was a (one) prediction of what the results might be if Scotland walks away from its share of UK Debt!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 21, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Another quote taken rather 'out of context'. That was a (one) prediction of what the results might be if Scotland walks away from its share of UK Debt!
		
Click to expand...

But he said it and that was the headline.  And to be honest I am not sure it does teh BT Campaign that much good - all this prediction of doom and gloom.  Beginning to sound like self-determination is a good thing - unless you are Scotland.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 24, 2014)

Kate Moss has made a statement re her 'Scotland stay with us, please' comment.

It seems that it was nothing to do with Bowie's statement. It was an instruction by the BBC Brit Awards director who was desperate to stop his Scottish viewers switching channels for a repeat of Robbie Sheppard's 'Take the Floor'.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 24, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Kate Moss has made a statement re her 'Scotland stay with us, please' comment.

It seems that it was nothing to do with Bowie's statement. It was an instruction by the BBC Brit Awards director who was desperate to stop his Scottish viewers switching channels for a repeat of Robbie Sheppard's 'Take the Floor'.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting jokey comment DfT - - though listening to R5L this morning a prof from Aberdeen Uni was talking about NSOG and how the majority was accepted to be in Scottish waters.  Nicky Campbell tried to introduce doubt about whether it did or not saying there was debate to be had.  Prof wasn't really having it.  Few moments after interview had concluded NC comes back with a couple of names of folk who had positions different from the profs (some folk still think the earth is flat btw).   All in the name of balance of course.  But actually just felt like the BBC being concerned that an opinion that could be deemed pro-YES went unchallenged.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 24, 2014)

Interesting that oil seems to be top of the No campaign agenda now, after 6 months of playing it down.

Do you think someone has spilled the beans about the secret West Coast oil fields.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 24, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But he said it and that was the headline.
		
Click to expand...

The headline, of course (and was it a headline?), didn't mention the key part of the statement - the 'if Scotland walks away its share of UK Debt' bit!


----------



## CMAC (Feb 24, 2014)

I heard Salmond on the radio this morning having a go at Cameron again saying he was running scared and thats why he's in Aberdeen and paying Scotland 'more' attention.

He (Salmond) seems to be using child like taunts at everything Cameron does, wheres the intelligent discussions and political debate? Mans a buffoon


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 24, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I heard Salmond on the radio this morning having a go at Cameron again saying he was running scared and thats why he's in Aberdeen and paying Scotland 'more' attention.

He (Salmond) seems to be using child like taunts at everything Cameron does, *wheres the intelligent discussions and political debate?* Mans a buffoon
		
Click to expand...

You'd need to ask Cameron, as PM of this country he refuses to engage in either with Salmond.

I have zero love for the jambo leader of The SNP, but the constant name calling and stereo typing of him by the main stream media is shameful, and it spills out into everyday life too where he's portrayed as wee fat eck, wearing a kilt and usually eating.


----------



## CMAC (Feb 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			You'd need to ask Cameron, *as PM of this country he refuses to engage in either with Salmond.*

I have zero love for the jambo leader of The SNP, but the constant name calling and stereo typing of him by the main stream media is shameful, and it spills out into everyday life too where he's portrayed as wee fat eck, wearing a kilt and usually eating.
		
Click to expand...

he has nothing to engage with as Salmond cant/wont come up with any definitive statements therefore it would be all assumption discussions and that can only lead one way.


----------



## One Planer (Feb 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			You'd need to ask Cameron, as PM of this country he refuses to engage in either with Salmond.
		
Click to expand...

Why would/should Cameron engage in a debate on a subject that is currently a Scottish matter?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 24, 2014)

CMAC said:



			he has nothing to engage with as Salmond cant/wont come up with any definitive statements therefore it would be all assumption discussions and that can only lead one way.
		
Click to expand...

But he can come up here and tell us we'd be unable to to survive without him?

As we say, Aye.Right.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 24, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			The headline, of course (and was it a headline?), didn't mention the key part of the statement - the 'if Scotland walks away its share of UK Debt' bit!
		
Click to expand...

Yes indeed - but as is the way of things I read a fair bit of comment where the 'walk away' context was not mentioned.  And of course it was going to be Â£5400 (or whatever the Â£5k+ figure mentioned was - I can't recall the precise figure).  So implication was that a YES will result in your mortgage going up by Â£5k+

Yes - it's just reporting - and it isn't the truth.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			But he can come up here and tell us we'd be unable to to survive without him?

As we say, Aye.Right.
		
Click to expand...

Quite - it seems that Cameron can engage in the debate without engaging in the debate.  And @Gareth - do you honestly consider whether Scotland leaves the UK or not, a matter for the Scottish electorate only and that there are no other stakeholders in the decision?  You may not care one way or another but a lot of folks outside of Scotland do - either because of potential impact on rUK if Scotland did leave - or like me for reasons closer to home.

It is hugely disingenuous to pretend that Cameron won't debate with Salmond because this is a matter for Scotland, when it clearly is not simply a matter for Scotland. Only Scotland will decide, but the implications and ramifications for rUK are many.


----------



## Val (Feb 24, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Why would/should Cameron engage in a debate on a subject that is currently a Scottish matter?
		
Click to expand...

It's a union matter, he is PM if the union.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 24, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It's a union matter, he is PM if the union.
		
Click to expand...

At the moment!

Things must be really bad as I saw that a recent poll had Labour in the lead for 2015.
The Kippers vote seems to have collapsed.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 24, 2014)

The whole salmond v Cameron debate thing is such a transparently obvious tactic it's quite depressing. Salmond doesn't want a debate, he wants to manipulate things to associate Cameron and the Tories (almost universally despised up here) directly with the no campaign and turn it into an "independence or Tories" question. If he really wanted a debate he'd have one with darling or Alexander who are both happy to take up the challenge. 

This issue transcends party politics, I'd take all the politicians out of it right now and make an end to all this pathetic childish posturing.

"Oh they're feart, they're bullies"; the man has no shame.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 24, 2014)

Surely Cameron IS on the side and part of the NO campaign if simply from observing his exhorting the rest of UK to encourage the Scots electorate to vote NO to stay in the union.  If he doesn't support the NO campaign he wouldn't be doing so.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 24, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Surely Cameron IS on the side and part of the NO campaign if simply from observing his exhorting the rest of UK to encourage the Scots electorate to vote NO to stay in the union.  If he doesn't support the NO campaign he wouldn't be doing so.
		
Click to expand...

Of course he is but he's also the last guy that unionists would want as their poster boy!


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 24, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			The whole salmond v Cameron debate thing is such a transparently obvious tactic it's quite depressing. Salmond doesn't want a debate, he wants to manipulate things to associate Cameron and the Tories (almost universally despised up here) directly with the no campaign and turn it into an "independence or Tories" question. If he really wanted a debate he'd have one with darling or Alexander who are both happy to take up the challenge. 

This issue transcends party politics, I'd take all the politicians out of it right now and make an end to all this pathetic childish posturing.

"Oh they're feart, they're bullies"; the man has no shame.
		
Click to expand...

Would be nice, but absolutely impossible to do. It's a 100% Political issue after all!



FairwayDodger said:





SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Surely Cameron IS on the side and part of the NO campaign if simply from observing his exhorting the rest of UK to encourage the Scots electorate to vote NO to stay in the union.  If he doesn't support the NO campaign he wouldn't be doing so.
		
Click to expand...

Of course he is but he's also the last guy that unionists would want as their poster boy!
		
Click to expand...

Which was a reasonably smart piece of good fortune/timing by Salmon.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 24, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Of course he is but he's also the last guy that unionists would want as their poster boy!
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely.  But he is still Prime Minister of the UK so should be up there fighting for the union not hiding behind some wheedling and disingenuous excuses about it being Scotland's debate,


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 24, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Absolutely.  But he is still Prime Minister of the UK so should be up there fighting for the union not hiding behind some wheedling and disingenuous excuses about it being Scotland's debate,
		
Click to expand...

The best thing he can do to keep the union together is stay out of the debate as much as possible. Sad but true.

This is not a short term decision about who the uk pm happens to be at the moment, frankly, that should be irrelevant.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 24, 2014)

In another time scale, I wonder if Thatcher would have debated.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 24, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In another time scale, I wonder if Thatcher would have debated.
		
Click to expand...

In Thatchers time there wouldn't be the thirst for an American style tv debate! Still not particularly sure about them.....

Re Cameron, a Tory PM telling Scottish people what to do (however well intentioned) would probably not have the desired effect!

I agree with Fairwaydodger that the current incumbents' (FM and PM) are not important so some televised debate amounting to petty politicking between them doesn't really seem so important to me.

I would wish Salmond would speak with him (and whoever else as necessary) to,provide more clarity where possible around events post anYes vote.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 24, 2014)

I would like to hear from the Scottish Labour, Liberal and Tory parties as to what they would do if the nation votes Yes.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 24, 2014)

Something that confuses me.   Seeing that every Labour Government has such a disastrous record with managing the economy, why do Scottish people want them in power 'And' if Labour were set to be the UK's Government for say the next 20 years would this affect Scotland's desire for independence?


----------



## Val (Feb 24, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Something that confuses me.   Seeing that every Labour Government has such a disastrous record with managing the economy, why do Scottish people want them in power 'And' if Labour were set to be the UK's Government for say the next 20 years would this affect Scotland's desire for independence?
		
Click to expand...


What makes you think we want Labour? It's probably more that we dont want a Tory government and realise the only way to out them is voting Labour.

If the Scottish wanted Labour they'd have a majority in Holyrood and we wouldnt be dealing with this independance nonsense. I'm of the belief that people in Scotland voted SNP as they offered more than Labour however those who voted did not automatically want independance by voting SNP, I believe had this independence referendum been on the cards im not convinced we'd have had a SNP majority at Holyrood.


----------



## Val (Feb 24, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			At the moment!

Things must be really bad as I saw that a recent poll had Labour in the lead for 2015.
The Kippers vote seems to have collapsed.
		
Click to expand...

At the moment yes, but we are dealing with the moment and it's 9939% certain he'll be Prime Minister of the union come September.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 24, 2014)

Valentino said:



			... I'm of the belief that people in Scotland voted SNP as they offered more than Labour however those who voted did not automatically want independance by voting SNP, I believe had this independence referendum been on the cards im not convinced we'd have had a SNP majority at Holyrood.
		
Click to expand...

But a referendum was a fundamental part of the SNP Manifesto! So they were warned at least - even if, as may/may not be the case, they weren't after independence. Of course, those that weren't will vote NO, or at least, not vote YES.



Doon frae Troon said:



			In another time scale, I wonder if *Thatcher* would have *debated*.
		
Click to expand...

Mutually exclusive terms!

Remember the way the Poll Tax was foisted upon Scotland - and the consequences!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 24, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			The best thing he can do to keep the union together is stay out of the debate as much as possible. Sad but true.

This is not a short term decision about who the uk pm happens to be at the moment, frankly, that should be irrelevant.
		
Click to expand...

Though he did say today that voters should judge on policies not personalities - and he was referring to Alex Salmond. So Dave get out there and debate on policy not personality and trust the scots electorate to differentiate between the two.  Or do you not trust in their ability to do that.  Ah - there's the rub.  Damned if you do - damned if you don't.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 24, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			In Thatchers time there wouldn't be the thirst for an American style tv debate! Still not particularly sure about them.....

Re Cameron, a Tory PM telling Scottish people what to do (however well intentioned) would probably not have the desired effect!

I agree with Fairwaydodger that the current incumbents' (FM and PM) are not important so some televised debate amounting to petty politicking between them doesn't really seem so important to me.

I would wish Salmond would speak with him (and whoever else as necessary) to,provide more clarity where possible around events post anYes vote.
		
Click to expand...

Don't forget that the referendum bill requires in the event of a YES vote for the rUK to work with an iScotland for the best solution to situation and issues - that hence by definition there is an joint understanding cannot be resolved prior to the referendum.


----------



## Slab (Feb 25, 2014)

Just popping into this thread now and again but wanted to say that what really scares me is not what will happen to xyz in the event of a Yes vote, but actually what will happen to xyz in the event of a No vote because if No means No Change, that might just scare me enough to vote Yes (if I lived in Scotland)

Was also pondering about the Union on the way to work this morning and how equal it is, 300 years old so they say, cant even change the currency to say Bank of United Kingdom in 300 years, good effort lads!

Might have helped the equal partner thing if Scots didn't have to change their currency when crossing to England! 

edit: sorry I know the above isn't even worthy of schoolboy logic, it just seems like both camps have resorted to sticking their fingers in their ears giving in lalalalalala whenever the people want a straight answer


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			But a referendum was a fundamental part of the SNP Manifesto! So they were warned at least - even if, as may/may not be the case, they weren't after independence. Of course, those that weren't will vote NO, or at least, not vote YES.
		
Click to expand...

That's part if the problem with party politics and FPTP. If I felt I could only vote for a party whose manifesto I agreed with 100% I would never have voted... Ever!


----------



## ger147 (Feb 25, 2014)

Well as a Scot with a vote in September this year who hasn't 100% made his mind up about what way he will vote, all I can say about the debate so far is that the best advocates for a Yes vote are the No campaign and the best advocates for a No vote are the Yes campaign.

Being faced with such a momentous decision, it would be nice, just for once, to have a proper debate about the pros and cons and the facts about the decision we face. I'll just stick to my Lotto ticket - better chance of my numbers coming up.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 25, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Something that confuses me.   Seeing that every Labour Government has such a disastrous record with managing the economy, why do Scottish people want them in power 'And' if Labour were set to be the UK's Government for say the next 20 years would this affect Scotland's desire for independence?
		
Click to expand...

There has to be a distinction drawn between New Labour and Scottish Labour.New Labour are virtually dead in Scotland, like the Lib Dem party, they're no longer the party of Keir Hardie, but there are reasons for that and you need to appreciate that UK wide, leftism wins you nothing.Now the Scottish electorate are the most tuned in group of voters, we see the difference between Holyrood and Westminster, appreciate The SNP @ Westminster is futile, refuse to vote conservative and, up until the coallition would have vote Lib Dem but they're done in now too.So we have to either not vote or vote New Labour in a UK GE.

There is still hope that in iScotland, Scottish Labour will refind their routes and challenge The SNP on centre left.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There has to be a distinction drawn between New Labour and Scottish Labour.New Labour are virtually dead in Scotland, like the Lib Dem party, they're no longer the party of Keir Hardie, but there are reasons for that and you need to appreciate that UK wide, leftism wins you nothing.Now the Scottish electorate are the most tuned in group of voters, we see the difference between Holyrood and Westminster, appreciate The SNP @ Westminster is futile, refuse to vote conservative and, up until the coallition would have vote Lib Dem but they're done in now too.So we have to either not vote or vote New Labour in a UK GE.

There is still hope that in iScotland, Scottish Labour will refind their routes and challenge The SNP on centre left.
		
Click to expand...

While you could well be right and there's a lot I agree with in that, I can't resist the following reinterpretation of some bits.....
How about....
Scots voters are a fickle lot, though stubbornly consistent in their 'balanced' hatred of Westminster and the Tories - or any party associated with them. With luck, someone will challenge SNP who are simply the best of a bad lot.


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			But a referendum was a fundamental part of the SNP Manifesto! So they were warned at least - even if, as may/may not be the case, they weren't after independence. Of course, those that weren't will vote NO, or at least, not vote YES.
		
Click to expand...

It's a fair point I suppose and if im honest I cannot remember the last Scottish elections where the referendum was a key part of the SNP campaign, im not saying it wasn't I just don't recall it.


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			While you could well be right and there's a lot I agree with in that, I can't resist the following reinterpretation of some bits.....
How about....
Scots voters are a fickle lot, though stubbornly consistent in their 'balanced' hatred of Westminster and the Tories - or any party associated with them. With luck, someone will challenge *SNP who are simply the best of a bad lot*.



Click to expand...

That bold bit is key, thats why I believe we have what we have currently in Scotland. Probably a bit like Tony Blairs' Labour who at the time were the same IMO. Governments in power have a shelf life, Labour had their time and now it's the Coalitions turn to try their good ideas and see how they fail and then realign themselves to new ideas before being voted out. It's happened for generations.


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There is still hope that in iScotland, Scottish Labour will refind their routes and challenge The SNP on centre left.
		
Click to expand...

Hope, it's a hard word in times like this though.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			How about....
Scots voters are a fickle lot, though stubbornly consistent in their 'balanced' hatred of Westminster and the Tories - or any party associated with them. With luck, someone will challenge SNP who are simply the best of a bad lot.



Click to expand...

You might have been fishing, but that's pretty accurate and nothing that I feel uncomfortable with...the only exception might be the best of a bad lot...when we have Patrick Harvie and Jim Sillars,Dennis Canavan,Annabel Goldie and Margo, I can't think of their equals in England?


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			You might have been fishing, but that's pretty accurate and nothing that I feel uncomfortable with...the only exception might be the best of a bad lot...when we have Patrick Harvie and Jim Sillars,Dennis Canavan,Annabel Goldie and Margo, I can't think of their equals in England?
		
Click to expand...

Jim Sillars speaks sense and is generally a good listen but his last appearance on BBCQT was a bit weird, he came across like someone who had no idea why he was there or what he was talking about.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Jim Sillars speaks sense and is generally a good listen but his last appearance on BBCQT was a bit weird, he came across like someone who had no idea why he was there or what he was talking about.
		
Click to expand...

Aye, but in contrast he was magnificent last night at the shettleston juniors debate, they broadcast it on the internet and he was simply magic....allow him a wee off day now and again, he's getting on!


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Aye, but in contrast he was magnificent last night at the shettleston juniors debate, they broadcast it on the internet and he was simply magic....allow him a wee off day now and again, *he's getting on*!
		
Click to expand...

and it showed on BBCQT 

It's interesting that he stated that he wanted independance but he said something along the lines of not wanting it done as they are doing currently. I'll be honest and say im not 100% sure on what his leanings were but I'm sure it was along the lines of there being no Plan B in the even of No EU membership, Pound etc etc. 

He's an interesting character.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			You might have been fishing, but that's pretty accurate and nothing that I feel uncomfortable with...the only exception might be the best of a bad lot...when we have Patrick Harvie and Jim Sillars,Dennis Canavan,Annabel Goldie and Margo, I can't think of their equals in England?
		
Click to expand...

No. Not fishing. 
It's always seemed to me that those not in positions of real power/control appear more sensible and statesman-like than those actually in control - and charged with the day-to-day running of 'the shop'. Likewise the elder statesmen, no longer charged with applying Government policy, so rather free-er to comment, sensibly, on their areas of expertise.
No experience of the folk you mention, but I'm sure there are the equivalents in the Westminster system - though almost certainly hamstrung by the particular party approach of that body! There are a fair few heavyweights in the House of Lords also! And there are a fair few idiots in all those Parliaments/Houses as well imo! But that's (our versions of) Democracy!

PS.@Val. As the issue of independence is quite important, can you please spell it correctly.  Not  normally bugged by spelling errors, but that one seems to for some reason.


----------



## One Planer (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			and it showed on BBCQT 

It's interesting that he stated that he wanted independance but he said something along the lines of not wanting it done as they are doing currently. *I'll be honest and say im not 100% sure on what his leanings were but I'm sure it was along the lines of there being no Plan B in the even of No EU membership, Pound etc etc*. 

He's an interesting character.
		
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to hear, especially from you guys north of the border, is there a plan B in case of the above?


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			PS.@Val. As the issue of independence is quite important, can you please spell it correctly.  Not  normally bugged by spelling errors, but that one seems to for some reason.
		
Click to expand...

Give me a break man, that's twice in 2 days you've done that, it must be the E or A thing


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Gareth said:



			It would be interesting to hear, especially from you guys north of the border, is there a plan B in case of the above?
		
Click to expand...

Not that we are aware of, Alex Salmond has said they can't stop us getting the pound and they can't stop us getting EU membership. If questioned on what happens if the do stop it, he simply replies they can't, no plan B and a dangerous game of poker.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Aye, but in contrast he was magnificent last night at the shettleston juniors debate, they broadcast it on the internet and he was simply magic....allow him a wee off day now and again, he's getting on!
		
Click to expand...

...and married to Margo...that's quite a gig!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			and it showed on BBCQT 

It's interesting that he stated that he wanted independance but he said something along the lines of not wanting it done as they are doing currently. I'll be honest and say im not 100% sure on what his leanings were but I'm sure it was along the lines of there being no Plan B in the even of No EU membership, Pound etc etc. 

He's an interesting character.
		
Click to expand...

Sillars makes no apology for his socialist bent...he'd do away with the Â£,not join the EU (EFTA is his choice),not join NATO and remove the royal family as head of state.

He can be pretty radical...he suggests we should take ownership of one of the two aircraft carriers being built and turn it into a hospital ship...weapon of war to ship of mercy.The principle is sound and well meaning, putting it into practice might be a wee bit harder.

but folk like him and Sheriden are the beauty of The Yes campaign...from biz for scotland to tommy!


----------



## One Planer (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Not that we are aware of, Alex Salmond has said they can't stop us getting the pound and they can't stop us getting EU membership. If questioned on what happens if the do stop it, he simply replies they can't, no plan B and a dangerous game of poker.
		
Click to expand...

Seriously!!! 

I know this is a little political here, but didn't Osbourne rule out a Sterling zone (... And was backed by other parties). If the BoE agrees, where does that leave Salmond?

EDIT: Did't a chap from the Eurozone also cast doubt over membership?

How can Salmond claim everyone to be wrong? Does an iScotland have a legal entitlement to what he claims or is it just rhetoric?


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Give me a break man, that's twice in 2 days you've done that, it must be the E or A thing  

Click to expand...

:rofl:

It was my E/A glitch in the Wallasey one - so 'honours even'!

Had almost forgotten that too. Obviously my Scottish 'long memory' gene has been eroded!



Gareth said:



			Seriously!!! 

I know this is a little political here, but didn't Osbourne rule out a Sterling zone (... And was backed by other parties). If the BoE agrees, where does that leave Salmond?
		
Click to expand...

It's all 'political' posturing.

Osborne ruled out a Sterling Zone on recommendation of Treasury - who were probably subtlely told what result to come up with!

Pretty much by definition, 'recommendation' means that there IS an alternative. So Sterling Zone isn't ruled out by Treasury.

Indeed, high stakes gambling all round!


----------



## CMAC (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Not that we are aware of, Alex Salmond has said they can't stop us getting the pound and they can't stop us getting EU membership. *If questioned on what happens if the do stop it, he simply replies they can't*, no plan B and a dangerous game of poker.
		
Click to expand...

I think this gets me more than any constructive argument. He just says 'we can'! and when asked what will happen if we arent allowed into the EU or cement existing GB relationships he says 'We will', when asked who are the numerous heads of major companies that he says all want devolution he says 'there are'! but never supplies any detail....
He would do well in the second hand car trade.

@val/Foxy easy way to remember is people must be DENCE if they support independence (yes I know Dense is with an 's') I'm not stoopid


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Not that we are aware of, Alex Salmond has said they can't stop us getting the pound and they can't stop us getting EU membership. If questioned on what happens if the do stop it, he simply replies they can't, no plan B and a dangerous game of poker.
		
Click to expand...

Not entirely accurate.Plan B is use the Â£ anyway, that much has been said.And he's never said they can't stop us gettin EU membership, but it would be highly improbable...there is no precedent for removing an entire founding nation from the EU.


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Not entirely accurate.Plan B is use the Â£ anyway, that much has been said.And he's never said they can't stop us gettin EU membership, but it would be highly improbable...*there is no precedent for removing an entire founding nation from the EU*.
		
Click to expand...

You do see what's being portrayed in the main though, it's the pound and that's it.

As for what I highlighted, we we a founding nation or part of the union that was part of the founding? This is where there is a lot of grey area on the EU thing, how is the UK looked on as a member? Is it all member countries of the union or is it the Union, if it's all member countries then Salmond has a case to argue, if it's the Union then there is no argument and the bigger argument would be those remaining as technically their membership with Scotland as part of the Union may render membership null and void.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Not that we are aware of, Alex Salmond has said they can't stop us getting the pound and they can't stop us getting EU membership. If questioned on what happens if the do stop it, he simply replies they can't, no plan B and a dangerous game of poker.
		
Click to expand...

Does the referendum bill not require Westminster to work with Scotland to deliver Plan A if that is what Scotland wants?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You do see what's being portrayed in the main though, it's the pound and that's it.

As for what I highlighted, we we a founding nation or part of the union that was part of the founding? This is where there is a lot of grey area on the EU thing, how is the UK looked on as a member? Is it all member countries of the union or is it the Union, if it's all member countries then Salmond has a case to argue, if it's the Union then there is no argument and the bigger argument would be those remaining as technically their membership with Scotland as part of the Union may render membership null and void.
		
Click to expand...

...and if Scotland is removed from the UK equation is there not a case for the rUK having to be reassessed for membership.  After all the rUK is not the UK - different country.  And on the EU matter - untangling Scotland from the EU legislation and redrafting all the legislation for to cover the rUK rather than the UK is going to be a mighty job.  So as Scotland will eventually (if not immediately) become part of the EU why would the EU want to go through the pain of Scottish disentanglement - just to go through bringing them onboard at a later date.  There seems to be a need for a little bit of realism on the part of the anti-Scotland EU brigade.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			As for what I highlighted, we we a founding nation or part of the union that was part of the founding? This is where there is a lot of grey area on the EU thing, how is the UK looked on as a member? Is it all member countries of the union or is it the Union, if it's all member countries then Salmond has a case to argue, if it's the Union then there is no argument and the bigger argument would be those remaining as technically their membership with Scotland as part of the Union may render membership null and void.
		
Click to expand...

The issue of whether rUK would cease to be a member of EU if Scotland was deemed a 'new country' does not appear to have been addressed by any politicians. It seems such an important issue that I'm certain it has already been cleared. If it hasn't been, then I'm equally certain that all the Pro Europe guys in Westminster would be kicking up a huge fuss about Scotland's Independence causing rUK's departure and therefore ALL of UK should be entitled to vote in Scotland's Referendum - as it affects rUK's EU status!

The SNP's view/gamble is that EU membership would be retained, but this is by no means certain - and the implication is that it would be 'difficult'!

Remember though, that the Referendum is not deciding on the mechanics - or timeframe, merely on the Policy.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Does the referendum bill not require Westminster to work with Scotland to deliver Plan A if that is what Scotland wants? 

Click to expand...

Not quite. Something about "negotiating in good faith".......


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Does the referendum bill not require Westminster to work with Scotland to deliver Plan A if that is what Scotland wants? 

Click to expand...

I've no idea if im honest


----------



## ger147 (Feb 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Does the referendum bill not require Westminster to work with Scotland to deliver Plan A if that is what Scotland wants? 

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't.


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and if Scotland is removed from the UK equation is there not a case for the rUK having to be reassessed for membership.  After all the rUK is not the UK - different country.
		
Click to expand...

Thats what I said



SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And on the EU matter - untangling Scotland from the EU legislation and redrafting all the legislation for to cover the rUK rather than the UK is going to be a mighty job.  So as Scotland will eventually (if not immediately) become part of the EU why would the EU want to go through the pain of Scottish disentanglement - just to go through bringing them onboard at a later date.  There seems to be a need for a little bit of realism on the part of the anti-Scotland EU brigade.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely, the main point though is that this scenario for better words is what "should" happen, however we all know what should and what do can be two polar opposites.


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			The issue of whether rUK would cease to be a member of EU if Scotland was deemed a 'new country' does not appear to have been addressed by any politicians. It seems such an important issue that I'm certain it has already been cleared. If it hasn't been, then I'm equally certain that all the Pro Europe guys in Westminster would be kicking up a huge fuss about Scotland's Independence causing rUK's departure and therefore ALL of UK should be entitled to vote in Scotland's Referendum - as it affects rUK's EU status!

*The SNP's view/gamble is that EU membership would be retained, but this is by no means certain - and the implication is that it would be 'difficult*'!

Remember though, that the Referendum is not deciding on the mechanics - or timeframe, merely on the Policy.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly, but Alex Salmond is portraying the view that it is certain despite reservations from Westminster and the EU.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 25, 2014)

If the EU do not accept an iScotland then iScotland could take the case to the European Human Rights Court.


----------



## One Planer (Feb 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If the EU do not accept an iScotland then iScotland could take the case to the European Human Rights Court.
		
Click to expand...

On what grounds (....Curious)?


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If the EU do not accept an iScotland then iScotland could take the case to the European Human Rights Court.
		
Click to expand...

I'll assume that's a tongue in cheek comment.


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 25, 2014)

Gareth said:



			On what grounds (....Curious)?
		
Click to expand...


I am more curious as to what is desirable about EU membership...

Don't wish to be 'bossed' by Westminster but quite happy to let Bruselles have their say...


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If the EU do not accept an iScotland then iScotland could take the case to the European Human Rights Court.
		
Click to expand...

Although tongue in cheek, I presume, it's worth noting that if the EU don't accept iScotland - and acceptance has to be unanimous - there's little iScotland could do about it!

So the rUK could throw the toys out of the pram and veto entry!


----------



## CMAC (Feb 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If the EU do not accept an iScotland then iScotland could take the case to the European Human Rights Court.
		
Click to expand...

on the "they're no letting me play with them" grounds I assume?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Although tongue in cheek, I presume, it's worth noting that if the EU don't accept iScotland - and acceptance has to be unanimous - there's little iScotland could do about it!

So the rUK could throw the toys out of the pram and veto entry!
		
Click to expand...

Assuming rUK got in? Not even sure they'd bother reapplying......


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Assuming rUK got in? Not even sure they'd bother reapplying......
		
Click to expand...


Hopefully not... But they will... 
Bruselles provides a huge safety net [gravy train] for the political classes and they won't give up on that too easily...


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Assuming rUK got in? Not even sure they'd bother reapplying......
		
Click to expand...

Well, 'stayed' in.

As I posted earlier, that was surely checked out early on in the process. But would avoid the rUK referendum on staying in. There would have been a lot of noise otherwise, both from the pro and con Europe guys and everyone that objects to the concept of Scotland controlling rUK's membership - without anyone in rUK having a vote on it!


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 25, 2014)

The EU will welcome an independEnt Scotland with open arms! All that Scottish revenue heading for Brussels.... wonder how much of a contribution they'll ask for?


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, 'stayed' in.

As I posted earlier, that was surely checked out early on in the process. But would avoid the rUK referendum on staying in. There would have been a lot of noise otherwise, both from the pro and con Europe guys and everyone that objects to the concept of Scotland controlling rUK's membership - without anyone in rUK having a vote on it!
		
Click to expand...

Im certain DC wouldn't have agreed to an independence referendum in Scotland had there been jeopardy in EU membership


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 25, 2014)

Not sure why anyone would think that comment was tongue in cheek?Scotland are looking for independence from The UK, not the EU.We are members and have been since 74?We've contributed financially,artistically and emotionally in the whole thing, so if I'm told I'm no longer allowed to travel and work in the EU because Scotland has removed itself (democratically) from The UK, with the explicit endorsement from The UK via The Edinburgh Agreement, I'd expect folk would look to take their case to the human rights board.


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Not sure why anyone would think that comment was tongue in cheek?Scotland are looking for independence from The UK, not the EU.We are members and have been since 74?We've contributed financially,artistically and emotionally in the whole thing, so if I'm told I'm no longer allowed to travel and work in the EU because Scotland has removed itself (democratically) from The UK, with the explicit endorsement from The UK via The Edinburgh Agreement, I'd expect folk would look to take their case to the human rights board.
		
Click to expand...

So how can you appeal to the European Courts if you are not an EU member? 

But going back to being a member since '74, this is where we've heard nothing definitive. Are all current union countries members of the EU are is it the Union? It's all assumption right now from the YES campaign and until someone says something definitive otherwise then you cannot base anything on assumption.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Although tongue in cheek, I presume, it's worth noting that if the EU don't accept iScotland - and acceptance has to be unanimous - there's little iScotland could do about it!

So the rUK could throw the toys out of the pram and veto entry!
		
Click to expand...

They could indeed - but as for many aspects of an iScotland working with a rUK following a YES, this action would hardly be conducive to establishing a harmonious relationship between two countries having many economic interdependencies.  I would have thought that it would be in the interests of any rUK government to use all reasonable endeavours to help Scotland to transition to a stable and economically sound and stable country - and so to help in whatever way it could rather than hinder.  Blocking Scotland's entry to the EU 'just for the hell of it' or indeed even for possibly good reasons from a broader EU perspective, would seem to be rather contrary and not particularly to the benefit of the rUK.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, 'stayed' in.

As I posted earlier, that was surely checked out early on in the process. But would avoid the rUK referendum on staying in. There would have been a lot of noise otherwise, both from the pro and con Europe guys and everyone that objects to the concept of Scotland controlling rUK's membership - without anyone in rUK having a vote on it!
		
Click to expand...

Have you heard Cameron tell us that rUK membership of the EU would be unaffected by Scotland getting kicked out of / removing itself from, the EU.  I haven't?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Not sure why anyone would think that comment was tongue in cheek?Scotland are looking for independence from The UK, not the EU.We are members and have been since 74?We've contributed financially,artistically and emotionally in the whole thing, so if I'm told I'm no longer allowed to travel and work in the EU because Scotland has removed itself (democratically) from The UK, with the explicit endorsement from The UK via The Edinburgh Agreement, I'd expect folk would look to take their case to the human rights board.
		
Click to expand...

So if I were living in Scotland the removal of my right to free movement and employment within the EU - through no action or fault of my own - hmmm.  And all those EU residents wishing to move to Scotland but no longer having the right to do so under EU law?  Can of worms.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Not sure why anyone would think that comment was tongue in cheek?Scotland are looking for independence from The UK, not the EU.We are members and have been since 74?We've contributed financially,artistically and emotionally in the whole thing, so if I'm told I'm no longer allowed to travel and work in the EU because Scotland has removed itself (democratically) from The UK, with the explicit endorsement from The UK via The Edinburgh Agreement, *I'd expect folk would look to take their case to the human rights board*.
		
Click to expand...

On what basis? You've already stated that everything was done on a Democratic basis. It's no different from reducing entry rights, for aliens, from Grandparent to Parent basis! And you don't get HR cases for that!

If you hadn't realised that loss of EU status, should it happen, was meaningless, then you are sorely mistaken!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So how can you appeal to the European Courts if you are not an EU member? 

But going back to being a member since '74, this is where we've heard nothing definitive. Are all current union countries members of the EU are is it the Union? It's all assumption right now from the YES campaign and until someone says something definitive otherwise then you cannot base anything on assumption.
		
Click to expand...

ECHR have nothing to do with the EU - citizens of all countries being members of the Council of Europe have access to it - and iScotland will be a member of the CoE


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			They could indeed - but as for many aspects of an iScotland working with a rUK following a YES, this action would hardly be conducive to establishing a harmonious relationship between two countries having many economic interdependencies.  I would have thought that it would be in the interests of any rUK government to use all reasonable endeavours to help Scotland to transition to a stable and economically sound and stable country - and so to help in whatever way it could rather than hinder.  Blocking Scotland's entry to the EU 'just for the hell of it' or indeed even for possibly good reasons from a broader EU perspective, would seem to be rather contrary and not particularly to the benefit of the rUK.
		
Click to expand...

In reality this will all happen post a YES vote but it won't stop the NO campaign saying these are all stumbling blocks that will be difficult to overcome as part of a YES vote in an effort to up the ante for the NO campaign.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 25, 2014)

Anyway, it's not rUK that would veto Scottish membership in the EU; it's Spain.


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			ECHR have nothing to do with the EU
		
Click to expand...

Hence the smilie


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Anyway, it's not rUK that would veto Scottish membership in the EU; it's Spain.
		
Click to expand...

At least


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			At least
		
Click to expand...

A new form of membership would be created for an iScotland - after all there is no precedent.  Scotland's application would be the opportunity for the EU to draft words that allow for a new state ceding from it's original member state with the agreement and support of the latter to join - whilst at the same time making it harder for new states ceding where that is opposed by the original member state to join.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Anyway, it's not rUK that would veto Scottish membership in the EU; it's Spain.
		
Click to expand...




Valentino said:



			At least
		
Click to expand...

I'll bet both of you Â£100 each to your chosen charity NO country vetoes Scotland joining the EU.

What happens to the thousands and thousands of europeans living and working in Scotland already?


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			ECHR have nothing to do with the EU - citizens of all countries being members of the Council of Europe have access to it - and iScotland will be a member of the CoE
		
Click to expand...

Not quite right!

EU is slowly but inexorably heading towards accession to the Convention on Human Rights, there are a few major steps to go yet.

But ECHR is certainly not subject to EU control etc. 

iScotland would, of course, have to sign up to the Convention, just as the likes of Russia, Ukraine, Georgia ex USSR did.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'll bet both of you Â£100 each to your chosen charity NO country vetoes Scotland joining the EU.

What happens to the thousands and thousands of europeans living and working in Scotland already?
		
Click to expand...

You're just getting silly now.  Anyway, it's already a much bigger gamble than Â£100.

Truthfully, I agree with you it's pretty unlikely any country will go as far as vetoing membership. Spain will, however, make the whole process as painful as possible.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 25, 2014)

Gareth said:



			On what grounds (....Curious)?
		
Click to expand...

They are all being beastly towards us.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			You're just getting silly now.  Anyway, it's already a much bigger gamble than Â£100.

Truthfully, I agree with you it's pretty unlikely any country will go as far as vetoing membership. Spain will, however, make the whole process as painful as possible.
		
Click to expand...

Spain will do absolutely nothing except welcome us (if we decide to join) with open arms.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Spain will do absolutely nothing except welcome us (if we decide to join) with open arms.
		
Click to expand...

No, they won't.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			No, they won't.
		
Click to expand...

@Adi will bet you they do 

I tell you guaranteed that a form of membership or words will be created that enables Scotland to join the EU that assuages the fears of Spain over the Catalans and the Basques.  And it will be to do with maintenance of harmonious relationship between separated parties - after all who invites to your party the couple who have just undergone or are going through a very acrimonious divorce and are battling things out in the courts.  They can come to your party as soon as both parties have comes to terms with their divorce and can demonstrate that they can be in the same room together and not fight and squabble and spoil the party for everyone else.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			No, they won't.
		
Click to expand...

Yes,they will.

Attempting to compare Scotland with Catalonia or the Basque region is foolish.Scotland is a recognised country, individual members of the Commonwealth,sporting bodies like UEFA and FIFA.We are not a region, and people should note that whenever the Spanish PM talks on the subject, he always refers to regions, not countries.And that's his get out.

And don't forget, Scotland would be contributors to the EU pot, unlike Spain who are,if I'm not mistaken, receive more than they contribute.Germany/France will spread the word, that their friends from Scotland are good members.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 25, 2014)

No one will know what the EU members will vote if Scotland asked to be a member of the EU

Nothing can be guaranteed 

Lots of people stating lots of things that "will" happen as if it's a fact and a guarantee when it's not


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			No, they won't.
		
Click to expand...

According to John Swinney...

 "The Spanish Foreign Minister said if there is an agreed process within the United Kingdom by which Scotland becomes an independent country then Spain has nothing to say about the whole issue."

But he's a little biased!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Yes,they will.

Attempting to compare Scotland with Catalonia or the Basque region is foolish.Scotland is a recognised country, individual members of the Commonwealth,sporting bodies like UEFA and FIFA.We are not a region, and people should note that whenever the Spanish PM talks on the subject, he always refers to regions, not countries.And that's his get out.

And don't forget, Scotland would be contributors to the EU pot, unlike Spain who are,if I'm not mistaken, receive more than they contribute.Germany/France will spread the word, that their friends from Scotland are good members.
		
Click to expand...

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Fortunately, we'll never find out the answer.....


----------



## Val (Feb 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'll bet both of you Â£100 each to your chosen charity NO country vetoes Scotland joining the EU.

What happens to the thousands and thousands of europeans living and working in Scotland already?
		
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to take that vote as I don't think we'll get a yes vote anyway 

However I don't gamble on politics


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 25, 2014)

Yes, I can just see the EU throwing out it's richest oil producing country, that makes a lot of sense.

We had Sturgeon going head to head with Lamount on an STV debate tonight.

Absolutely awful, they should both hang their heads in shame.
Both talking over each other like a couple of demented fishwifes.
Nothing to report as I could not hear a word either were saying.


----------



## CMAC (Feb 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Yes, I can just see the EU throwing out it's richest oil producing country, that makes a lot of sense.

We had Sturgeon going head to head with Lamount on an STV debate tonight.

Absolutely awful, they should both hang their heads in shame.
Both talking over each other like a couple of demented fishwifes.
Nothing to report as I could not hear a word either were saying.
		
Click to expand...

couldnt agree more- embarrassing unprofessional shouting match. What on earth was the debate chairwoman doing? whispering "one at a time please" was the best she could muster.

Is this how the govt would be run with a yes vote? These are 2 of the most senior people in Scottish politics which is frightening for our future.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 26, 2014)

Yup, utterly woeful display from all concerned...however...Scotland isn't genetically programmed to make political decisions.


----------



## Val (Feb 26, 2014)

Last nights debate was nothing more than a rabble, how 2 political journalists could pick their way through what was said and decide who came out better is beyond me. All I could see for it was that Joann Lamont was not bullied like the others who stood toe to toe with Nicola Sturgeon, who did her best to shout down Joann Lamont and every opportunity.

Shocking, we know nothing today that we didn't know yesterday.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 26, 2014)

The journalists were nearly as embarrassing as the alleged politicians.

We deserve better.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 26, 2014)

I think the EU would welcome Scotland with open arms.  They are in dire need of more countries where they can bleed money to support their basket case economies.

Also, if Scotland feel the UK restricts their freedom of self determination then they aint seen notthin yet!   Wait until Brussels get involved directly with a small new member!!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 26, 2014)

Well for starters I am pretty confident that we would negotiate better fishing and hill farming deals than the one Wasteminster hands to us.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 27, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Also, if Scotland feel the UK restricts their freedom of self determination then they aint seen notthin yet!   Wait until Brussels get involved directly with a small new member!!
		
Click to expand...

Just to make you aware, as a current members we're already aware of how The EU works and what we'd be getting involved with,but thanks for giving us the inside perspective.And I'm not sure the size of the nation actually makes much difference, unless your insight can tell me otherwise?..is there a sliding scale of involvement based on some kind of formula we've been kept away from?


----------



## CMAC (Feb 27, 2014)

So Now Standard Life step up to the plate and are putting in contingency plans to move to England if Scotland vote for Independence. They have been here 189 years. Does Alex Salmond not get it? Mr Salmond said he knows of numerous large companies that want separation....but he cant name them 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26362321


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Just to make you aware, as a current members we're already aware of how The EU works and what we'd be getting involved with,but thanks for giving us the inside perspective.And I'm not sure the size of the nation actually makes much difference, unless your insight can tell me otherwise?..is there a sliding scale of involvement based on some kind of formula we've been kept away from?
		
Click to expand...

Yes there are for new members.   They have to join the Euro Zone to start with. There is also a sliding scale on voting weight based on population.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 27, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Yes there are for new members.   *They have to join the Euro Zone to start with*. There is also a sliding scale on voting weight based on population.
		
Click to expand...

No you don't.If we intend to discuss various aspects of Scottish independence, lets do it based on fact.you have to commit to join the euro when you meet certain financial criteria, and the decision when you meet that criteria is decided by each individual country, so we may to never meet that criteria.

As sliding scale on voting based on population?do you mean the population of a country = how many mep's they have?Well, we'd have the same representation today as we'd have post yes.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 27, 2014)

CMAC said:



			So Now Standard Life step up to the plate and are putting in contingency plans to move to England if Scotland vote for Independence. They have been here 189 years. Does Alex Salmond not get it? Mr Salmond said he knows of numerous large companies that want separation....but he cant name them 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26362321

Click to expand...

For accuracy, lets use Standard Deaths actual statement instead of yet another unionists slate.

http://www.standardlife.com/utility/customer_statement.html

they also said they'd leave post-devolution btw.Still here, will be next year too.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 27, 2014)

S&P statement on iScotland

http://now.eloqua.com/es.asp?s=302554905&e=185058&elq=200eab27ace14d7fa063a7856c6dec8b


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			For accuracy, lets use Standard Deaths actual statement instead of yet another unionists slate.

http://www.standardlife.com/utility/customer_statement.html

they also said they'd leave post-devolution btw.Still here, will be next year too.
		
Click to expand...

I heard - though whether implied from the statement or taken from a briefing on the statement or fuller statement I don't know - was that key considerations for Standard Life would be around taxation and currency.  What I might draw from that would be that SL would prefer taxation in an iScotland to not be to the detriment of their customers, and that they would also prefer a common currency with the rUK.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			S&P statement on iScotland

http://now.eloqua.com/es.asp?s=302554905&e=185058&elq=200eab27ace14d7fa063a7856c6dec8b

Click to expand...

Ach - what do they know about economics...


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			S&P statement on iScotland

http://now.eloqua.com/es.asp?s=302554905&e=185058&elq=200eab27ace14d7fa063a7856c6dec8b

Click to expand...

Quite a balanced assessment, unfortunately one that will undoubtedly be spun both ways.

Interesting (to my untrained eye) they think we'd be better off if the banks left!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 27, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Quite a balanced assessment, unfortunately one that will undoubtedly be spun both ways.

*Interesting (to my untrained eye) they think we'd be better off if the banks left![*/QUOTE]

that was my initial reaction...might be better if Standard Death did leave.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			As sliding scale on voting based on population?do you mean the population of a country = how many mep's they have?Well, we'd have the same representation today as we'd have post yes.
		
Click to expand...

This is what I mean:  http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/glossary/weighting_votes_council_en.htm


----------



## CMAC (Feb 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:





FairwayDodger said:



			Quite a balanced assessment, unfortunately one that will undoubtedly be spun both ways.

*Interesting (to my untrained eye) they think we'd be better off if the banks left![*/QUOTE]

that was my initial reaction..*.might be better if Standard Death did leave.*

Click to expand...

why do you think that?
		
Click to expand...


----------



## the smiling assassin (Feb 27, 2014)

having grown up in the highlands, all the anti-westminster-centric stuff being prodded about comes across as seriously hypocritical. 

scotland is so central-belt-centric! 

what's next, can we have an independant highlands and islands with our own share of the north sea oil? no, as it would be stupid and petty minded and downright pathetic really. :thup:


----------



## ger147 (Feb 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:





FairwayDodger said:



			Quite a balanced assessment, unfortunately one that will undoubtedly be spun both ways.

*Interesting (to my untrained eye) they think we'd be better off if the banks left![*/QUOTE]

that was my initial reaction...might be better if Standard Death did leave.
		
Click to expand...

Very easy statement to make if you're not one of the 5,000 people who would lose their jobs unless they emigrate to a foreign country to keep them.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 27, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Very easy statement to make if you're not one of the 5,000 people who would lose their jobs unless they emigrate to a foreign country to keep them.
		
Click to expand...

Don't misunderstand me - I don't believe that at all. But if you read the article S&P postulate that from their rating perspective the high proportion of Scottish GDP in the financial sector would be a risk. I only commented on that as I found it an interesting position that I hadn't heard expressed previously.


----------



## CMAC (Feb 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			For accuracy, lets use Standard Deaths actual statement instead of yet another unionists slate.

http://www.standardlife.com/utility/customer_statement.html

they also said they'd leave post-devolution btw.Still here, will be next year too.
		
Click to expand...

for even more accuracy lets use their chief execs actual words;

Standard Life's chief executive, David Nish, the company - which has had its headquarters in Scotland for 189 years - has "started work to establish additional registered companies to operate outside Scotland, into which we could transfer parts of our operations if necessary".

"This is a precautionary measure to ensure continuity of our businesses' competitive position and to protect the interests of our stakeholders."


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 27, 2014)

CMAC said:



			for even more accuracy lets use their chief execs actual words;

Standard Life's chief executive, David Nish, the company - which has had its headquarters in Scotland for 189 years - has "started work to establish additional registered companies to operate outside Scotland, into which we could transfer parts of our operations if necessary".

"This is a precautionary measure to ensure continuity of our businesses' competitive position and to protect the interests of our stakeholders."
		
Click to expand...

Which is an honest statement and what you'd expect companies to be doing.  What would be really interesting would be to see their risk assessment and mitigation plans.  I wonder if an iScotland not being 'allowed' to join a UK 'sterling zone' is a big RED.  Because if it is you can bet that one of their risk mitigations activities will be to put pressure on Westminster to create a 'sterling zone' with Scotland.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 27, 2014)

Looks like a tax dodging issue to me, whilst retaining the majority of staff in Scotland.
Could backfire on them either way.

Someone reported that this was the first large company to say that they would 'leave' Scotland if the people vote yes.
I was surprised by that.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Looks like a tax dodging issue to me, whilst retaining the majority of staff in Scotland.
Could backfire on them either way.

Someone reported that this was the first large company to say that they would 'leave' Scotland if the people vote yes.
I was surprised by that.
		
Click to expand...

But they didn't actually say they would leave did they Doon?  They are making contingency plans for the event of a YES vote and appropriate arrangements with rUK not being forthcoming.

Opportunity knocks for an iScotland government on the corporate tax break front perhaps?


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 27, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Which is an honest statement and what you'd expect companies to be doing.  What would be really interesting would be to see their risk assessment and mitigation plans.  I wonder if an iScotland not being 'allowed' to join a UK 'sterling zone' is a big RED.  Because if it is you can bet that one of their risk mitigations activities will be to put pressure on Westminster to create a 'sterling zone' with Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

You pretty much have seen their risk assessment and mitigation plans!!??

They think there is a risk so have set up non Scottish registered companies as mitigation.....


----------



## Val (Feb 27, 2014)

CMAC said:



			So Now Standard Life step up to the plate and are putting in contingency plans to move to England if Scotland vote for Independence. They have been here 189 years. Does Alex Salmond not get it? Mr Salmond said he knows of numerous large companies that want separation....but he cant name them 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26362321

Click to expand...

As stated earlier in this thread, I know of 2 Â£100m+ A year businesses who are in the no camp and are holding off showing their hand.


----------



## Val (Feb 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:





FairwayDodger said:



			Quite a balanced assessment, unfortunately one that will undoubtedly be spun both ways.

*Interesting (to my untrained eye) they think we'd be better off if the banks left!*

Click to expand...

that was my initial reaction...might be better if Standard Death did leave.
		
Click to expand...

And how many would that leave looking for jobs in this potential wee independant nation

Edit - this threat has been pointed out, so duplicate post


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 27, 2014)

CMAC said:



			for even more accuracy lets use their chief execs actual words;

Standard Life's chief executive, David Nish, the company - which has had its headquarters in Scotland for 189 years - has "started work to establish additional registered companies to operate outside Scotland, into which we could transfer parts of our operations if necessary".

"This is a precautionary measure to ensure continuity of our businesses' competitive position and to protect the interests of our stakeholders."
		
Click to expand...

And to be absolutely accurate, here's his entire statement on the matter!

"As a large company and employer based in Scotland, we have been following the constitutional debate ahead of the independence 
referendum on 18 September 2014. We have a long-standing policy of strict political neutrality and at no time will we advise people on how they should vote. However, we have a duty and a responsibility to understand the implications of independence for our four million UK customers, our shareholders, our people and other stakeholders in our business and take whatever action is necessary to protect their interests. For this reason, we have engaged with key politicians and analysed the relevant papers published by both sides of the  independence debate. These include the Scottish Government publication Scotlandâ€™s Future (the â€˜White Paperâ€™) and the UK Governmentâ€™s Scotland Analysis series.
At the time of publishing this report (February 2014), we believe a number of material issues remain uncertain. These include: 
â€¢ The currency that an independent Scotland would use 
â€¢ Whether agreement and ratification of an independent Scotlandâ€™s membership to the European Union would be achieved by the 
target date (currently 24 March 2016) 
â€¢ The shape and role of the monetary system 
â€¢ The arrangements for financial services regulation and consumer protection in an independent Scotland 
â€¢ The approach to individual taxation, especially around savings and pensions, as a consequence of any constitutional change. 
We will continue to seek clarity on these matters, but uncertainty is likely to remain. In view of this, there are steps we will take based on our analysis of the risks. For example, we have started work to establish additional registered companies to operate outside Scotland, into which we could transfer parts of our operations if it was necessary to do so. This is a precautionary measure to ensure continuity of our businessesâ€™ competitive position and to protect the interests of our stakeholders. As Chief Executive, my commitment is whatever happens, we will continue to serve the needs of our customers and maintain our competitive position."


----------



## CMAC (Feb 27, 2014)

Valentino said:



			As stated earlier in this thread, I know of 2 Â£100m+ A year businesses who are in the no camp and are holding off showing their hand.
		
Click to expand...

why would they do this yet make it open knowledge to you? forgive me if you are the owner or CEO of these companies, but if they want secrecy about this and its not official it can only be hearsay


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 28, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Very easy statement to make if you're not one of the 5,000 people who would lose their jobs unless they emigrate to a foreign country to keep them.
		
Click to expand...

Moving where Company is domiciled wouldn't necessarily mean loss of any of their jobs!

Think how many people there'd be in the Caymans, IOM or Channel Islands if that's what had to happen!

Something rather disappointing to point out though - I've suspected it for a while (25 years or more). The Beeb is not quite the independent reporter of news it purports to be - at least not for references. A reference on the Home Page was worded 'Standard Life quit plan sparks row'. There's an implication there that just doesn't exist. Headline on the actual article was totally different and more neutral though.


----------



## williamalex1 (Feb 28, 2014)

View attachment 9329
I hope not.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 28, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Moving where Company is domiciled wouldn't necessarily mean loss of any of their jobs!

Think how many people there'd be in the Caymans, IOM or Channel Islands if that's what had to happen!

Something rather disappointing to point out though - I've suspected it for a while (25 years or more). The Beeb is not quite the independent reporter of news it purports to be - at least not for references. A reference on the Home Page was worded 'Standard Life quit plan sparks row'. There's an implication there that just doesn't exist. Headline on the actual article was totally different and more neutral though.
		
Click to expand...

I was replying to Adi2's comment that it would be better if Standard Life left Scotland, not the Standard Life CEO's statement.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 28, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			You pretty much have seen their risk assessment and mitigation plans!!??

They think there is a risk so have set up non Scottish registered companies as mitigation.....
		
Click to expand...

To be precise I am guessing that that's their risk contingency. I guess they would prefer to stay where they are unless their operating environment in Scotland becomes significantly worse.  They are making contingency plans in the event that they decide they have to move.  But they will try and reduce the likely of this being necessary through their risk mitigation plan - and an element of that will be raising awareness to the rUK and Scottish governments of the risk to their business and that they are putting in place contingency plans.   Post a YES vote they would be lobbying BOTH governments to try and ensure that an environment suitable to their needs is maintained in Scotland.  If part of that environment is a 'sterling zone' then that is what they would lobby the rUK government for.

And reading back @Foxholder has quoted the full statement which contains a statement of SL identifying the risks to their business being maintained in Scotland.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 28, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I was replying to Adi2's comment that it would be better if Standard Life left Scotland, not the Standard Life CEO's statement.
		
Click to expand...

Fair enough. That wasn't particularly obvious to me. The quote that got posted was FD's. 

My comment, about where company is domiciled, still applies. I wouldn't expect to see immediate transfer of staff. There's plenty of Scottish financial sector companies with a presence in London (EC2/3 area) already.

And while he doesn't seem to have a great love for that Company, the S&P report referred specifically to the possible 'benefits' if 'Banks', which SL is not, left as opposed to being part of the 'financial sector' to which it does belong.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 28, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Fair enough. That wasn't particularly obvious to me. The quote that got posted was FD's.
		
Click to expand...

Which was my take on what S&P seemed to be suggesting....



Foxholer said:



			My comment, about where company is domiciled, still applies. I wouldn't expect to see immediate transfer of staff. There's plenty of Scottish financial sector companies with a presence in London (EC2/3 area) already.

And while he doesn't seem to have a great love for that Company, the S&P report referred specifically to the possible 'benefits' if 'Banks', which SL is not, left as opposed to being part of the 'financial sector' to which it does belong.
		
Click to expand...

Ooh, I wonder if that's nit-picking or if they really meant that.... Interesting.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 28, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Fair enough. That wasn't particularly obvious to me. The quote that got posted was FD's.
		
Click to expand...

Adi2's quote was there too but for some reason the formatting highlighted FD's reply instead.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			To be precise I am guessing that that's their risk contingency. I guess they would prefer to stay where they are unless their operating environment in Scotland becomes significantly worse.  They are making contingency plans in the event that they decide they have to move.  But they will try and reduce the likely of this being necessary through their risk mitigation plan - and an element of that will be raising awareness to the rUK and Scottish governments of the risk to their business and that they are putting in place contingency plans.   Post a YES vote they would be lobbying BOTH governments to try and ensure that an environment suitable to their needs is maintained in Scotland.  If part of that environment is a 'sterling zone' then that is what they would lobby the rUK government for.

And reading back @Foxholder has quoted the full statement which contains a statement of SL identifying the risks to their business being maintained in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

"To be precise I am guessing"  :rofl:

The quote from SL is below.  They have highlighted areas that are risks, to reduce the impact on their business/customers they are taking steps including setting up non-dom in Scotland companies.  

_"We will continue to seek clarity on these matters, but uncertainty is likely to remain. In view of this, there are steps we will take based on our analysis of the risks. For example, we have started work to establish additional registered companies to operate outside Scotland, into which we could transfer parts of our operations if it was necessary to do so. This is a precautionary measure to ensure continuity of our businessesâ€™ competitive position and to protect the interests of our stakeholders. As Chief Executive, my commitment is whatever happens, we will continue to serve the needs of our customers and maintain our competitive position." _


----------



## Val (Feb 28, 2014)

CMAC said:



			why would they do this yet make it open knowledge to you? forgive me if you are the owner or CEO of these companies, but if they want secrecy about this and its not official it can only be hearsay
		
Click to expand...

Part of their business relies on purchasing resources controlled by the Scottish executive and any show of political leanings may jeopardise their procurement costs in turn affecting their ability to trade


----------



## Val (Feb 28, 2014)

I should add that of course it's hearsay but there's no smoke without fire


----------



## CMAC (Feb 28, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I should add that of course it's hearsay but there's no smoke without fire
		
Click to expand...

usually its no smoke without mirrors when it comes to all these 'informed' individuals. Rangers/Dyson/Woods etc were full of unsubstanciated rumours that when said in a certain way were perceived as fact.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 28, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			"To be precise I am guessing"  :rofl:

The quote from SL is below.  They have highlighted areas that are risks, to reduce the impact on their business/customers they are taking steps including setting up non-dom in Scotland companies.  

_"We will continue to seek clarity on these matters, but uncertainty is likely to remain. In view of this, there are steps we will take based on our analysis of the risks. For example, we have started work to establish additional registered companies to operate outside Scotland, into which we could transfer parts of our operations if it was necessary to do so. This is a precautionary measure to ensure continuity of our businessesâ€™ competitive position and to protect the interests of our stakeholders. As Chief Executive, my commitment is whatever happens, we will continue to serve the needs of our customers and maintain our competitive position." _

Click to expand...

Sorry - what I meant was to be precise what the SL CEO is talking about is their risks and their risk contingency planning.  I'd be interested in their risk mitigation plans because in general you want to avoid implementing your contingencies - they can cost a lot of money.  Much better to spend money and do whatever is required to mitigate the risks so you don't have do implement your contingency plans.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Sorry - what I meant was to be precise what the SL CEO is talking about is their risks and their risk contingency planning.  I'd be interested in their risk mitigation plans because in general you want to avoid implementing your contingencies - they can cost a lot of money.  Much better to spend money and do whatever is required to mitigate the risks so you don't have do implement your contingency plans.
		
Click to expand...

This is off on a tangent but they have already implemented their mitigation techniques of non-Scottish companies!!

Semantics and not important anyway, I'd imagine they wouldn't want to leave and pretty sure Salmond/Yes camp wouldn't welcome it either.

The interesting point (that I keep talking about) is that the CEO mentions the level of uncertainty....  Surely the ball is in Salmond's camp to, as much as possible, lessen the uncertainty?  

Financial Services is c. 15% of Scottish GDP.  S&P may well consider that to be a bit high and therefore a "risk" in terms of their rating/assessment, a bigger risk (IMO) from an Independent Scotland's point of view is losing 15% of GDP......


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 28, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			The interesting point (that I keep talking about) is that the CEO mentions the level of uncertainty....  Surely the ball is in Salmond's camp to, as much as possible, lessen the uncertainty?
		
Click to expand...

It should be but Salmond's strategy is to label anyone suggesting possible difficulties and seeking clarity as a "feartie". Or anyone who stands up and says "no" as a "bully".

It's playground politics.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 28, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It should be but Salmond's strategy is to label anyone suggesting possible difficulties and seeking clarity as a "feartie". Or anyone who stands up and says "no" as a "bully".

*It's playground politics*.
		
Click to expand...

Sadly for such an important issue I agree.......


----------



## Val (Feb 28, 2014)

CMAC said:



			usually its no smoke without mirrors when it comes to all these 'informed' individuals. Rangers/Dyson/Woods etc were full of unsubstanciated rumours that when said in a certain way were perceived as fact.
		
Click to expand...

When you hear it mention by two CEO's then you take notice


----------



## CMAC (Feb 28, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			This is off on a tangent but they have already implemented their mitigation techniques of non-Scottish companies!!

Semantics and not important anyway, I'd imagine they wouldn't want to leave and pretty sure Salmond/Yes camp wouldn't welcome it either.

*The interesting point (that I keep talking about) is that the CEO mentions the level of uncertainty....  Surely the ball is in Salmond's camp to, as much as possible, lessen the uncertainty? * 

Financial Services is c. 15% of Scottish GDP.  S&P may well consider that to be a bit high and therefore a "risk" in terms of their rating/assessment, a bigger risk (IMO) from an Independent Scotland's point of view is losing 15% of GDP......
		
Click to expand...

exactly- but direct questions seeking detail are met with "It will be", "They cant", "We will", "It will benefit us all" blah blah blah politician speak with no names, no detail, so solutions and no plan B

Sturgeons disgraceful showing the other night was a frightening peak into an independent Scottish Govt.


----------



## Val (Feb 28, 2014)

However until lots public that it can only ever be rumour or hearsay


----------



## Val (Feb 28, 2014)

CMAC said:



			exactly- but direct questions seeking detail are met with "It will be", "They cant", "We will", "It will benefit us all" blah blah blah politician speak with no names, no detail, so solutions and no plan B

Sturgeons disgraceful showing the other night was a frightening peak into an independent Scottish Govt.
		
Click to expand...

It appears that the YES campaign is based on they can't do .... and they won't do ...


----------



## JCW (Feb 28, 2014)

I think they better off as they are , Its others playing politics for their own ends , when it goes wrong they wont be there ................................glad I don't have to vote as Dad choose to retire here in Poole Dorset rather then Dundee , weather being the main reason for that , I know its still raining , course closed again this morning after the rain last night


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 28, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			The interesting point (that I keep talking about) is that the CEO mentions the level of uncertainty....  Surely the ball is in Salmond's camp to, as much as possible, lessen the uncertainty?  

Financial Services is c. 15% of Scottish GDP.  S&P may well consider that to be a bit high and therefore a "risk" in terms of their rating/assessment, a bigger risk (IMO) from an Independent Scotland's point of view is losing 15% of GDP......
		
Click to expand...

To be fair to Salmond (much as it goes against the grain!) he has stated a policy - in the White Paper - and all he is doing is sticking to the Plan. To announce/provide a 'Plan B' would allow opponents to argue, whether validly or not, that he doesn't really have a proper plan in the first place, something he would be very unwise to do! The 'it will', 'we can' approach may provide a small amount of ammo for opponents, but the 'just bullying' response isn't such a bad one, especially, as others have posted, is even likely to sway a few fence-sitters - stubborn-ness and belligerence being seen as a 'positive national trait'!    

Indeed playground politics, but with few quantifiable policies, was/is always going to be that way!

I don't think S&P were considering the loss of ALL of Scotland's Financial Services, merely the (dodgy?) Banks.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 28, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			To be fair to Salmond (much as it goes against the grain!) he has stated a policy - in the White Paper - and all he is doing is sticking to the Plan. To announce/provide a 'Plan B' would allow opponents to argue, whether validly or not, that he doesn't really have a proper plan in the first place, something he would be very unwise to do! The 'it will', 'we can' approach may provide a small amount of ammo for opponents, but the 'just bullying' response isn't such a bad one, especially, as others have posted, is even likely to sway a few fence-sitters - stubborn-ness and belligerence being seen as a 'positive national trait'!    

Indeed playground politics, but with few quantifiable policies, was/is always going to be that way!

I don't think S&P were considering the loss of ALL of Scotland's Financial Services, merely the (dodgy?) Banks.
		
Click to expand...

The White Paper is nothing more than what they _want_ to happen rather than what is possible or reasonable to expect, there is a difference.

Whenever Salmond is asked how they are going to achieve their wish list he has no basis of fact to respond or reassure and seemingly isn't interested in doing so.

I should have added that obviously not all FS in Scotland would disappear, although appreciate your usual attention to pedantry :ears:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 28, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			This is off on a tangent but they have already implemented their mitigation techniques of non-Scottish companies!!

Semantics and not important anyway, I'd imagine they wouldn't want to leave and pretty sure Salmond/Yes camp wouldn't welcome it either.

The interesting point (that I keep talking about) is that the CEO mentions the level of uncertainty....  Surely the ball is in Salmond's camp to, as much as possible, lessen the uncertainty?  

Financial Services is c. 15% of Scottish GDP.  S&P may well consider that to be a bit high and therefore a "risk" in terms of their rating/assessment, a bigger risk (IMO) from an Independent Scotland's point of view is losing 15% of GDP......
		
Click to expand...

He can lessen the uncertainty - but I would like to see the CEO put the statement straight to Cameron and Osborne along the lines of...

 'You do absolutely understand that if Scotland votes YES and you do *not *agree to Scotland joining rUK in a Sterling Zone then we will pull out of Scotland - with the impact that will have on Scotland and the cost that doing so will have to us.  Scotland in a Sterling Zone is critical to us staying in Scotland and we want to stay in Scotland.  You have stated that under no circumstances will rUK entertain Scotland in a Sterling Zone. If that is the case then on the announcement of a YES vote we will immediately begin to implement our contingency plans for withdrawal.  So tell me now and put aside any political shenanigans and posturing - is the 'no sterling zone' now carved in stone.  Yes or No - we have to know'.

And I would love to be a fly on the wall.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			He can lessen the uncertainty - but I would like to see the CEO put the statement straight to Cameron and Osborne along the lines of...

 'You do absolutely understand that if Scotland votes YES and you do *not *agree to Scotland joining rUK in a Sterling Zone then we will pull out of Scotland - with the impact that will have on Scotland and the cost that doing so will have to us.  Scotland in a Sterling Zone is critical to us staying in Scotland and we want to stay in Scotland.  You have stated that under no circumstances will rUK entertain Scotland in a Sterling Zone. If that is the case then on the announcement of a YES vote we will immediately begin to implement our contingency plans for withdrawal.  So tell me now and put aside any political shenanigans and posturing - is the 'no sterling zone' now carved in stone.  Yes or No - we have to know'.

And I would love to be a fly on the wall.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, that would be fun to watch!

But it would be against those Companies 'political neutrality' to do it (in the open!).


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			He can lessen the uncertainty - but I would like to see the CEO put the statement straight to Cameron and Osborne along the lines of...

 'You do absolutely understand that if Scotland votes YES and you do *not *agree to Scotland joining rUK in a Sterling Zone then we will pull out of Scotland - with the impact that will have on Scotland and the cost that doing so will have to us.  Scotland in a Sterling Zone is critical to us staying in Scotland and we want to stay in Scotland.  You have stated that under no circumstances will rUK entertain Scotland in a Sterling Zone. If that is the case then on the announcement of a YES vote we will immediately begin to implement our contingency plans for withdrawal.  So tell me now and put aside any political shenanigans and posturing - is the 'no sterling zone' now carved in stone.  Yes or No - we have to know'.

And I would love to be a fly on the wall.
		
Click to expand...

I agree thats the question that should be put to Osborne etc but by Alex Salmond not every CEO of a Scottish based company FFS!!!!

It is up to Salmond to present what the situation post Yes will be as he is the one pushing for it and the national (political) leader in that event.

I'm intrigued that you always think the onus is on Westminster rather than the (proposed) Scottish government to provide answers?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 28, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			I agree thats the question that should be put to Osborne etc but by Alex Salmond not every CEO of a Scottish based company FFS!!!!

It is up to Salmond to present what the situation post Yes will be as he is the one pushing for it and the national (political) leader in that event.

I'm intrigued that you always think the onus is on Westminster rather than the (proposed) Scottish government to provide answers?
		
Click to expand...

But the CEO can check with Cameron and Osborne that what they have set is indeed set in stone or if it is political positioning.  Salmond is utterly unable to answer that question.  He can suggest that the C&O 'No Sterling Zone' is political posturing - but only C&O can tell the CEO the facts as THEY and ONLY THEY can determine whether a Sterling Zone will happen.  Salmond can only predict that it will.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 28, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			I'm intrigued that you always think the onus is on Westminster rather than the (proposed) Scottish government to provide answers?
		
Click to expand...

Well, the White Paper has provided all the answers Scotland needed - hasn't it?

So if Westminster is arguing something different, it's them that needs to provide 'answers' surely!

Btw. This post doesn't mean I'm taking sides. Just trying to explain the issue/onus (hopefully) logically.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 28, 2014)

But.... as far as the sterling zone idea goes, this is one of the few areas where we've been given a definitive answer.... rUK says "No". 

The implication here seems to be that the SL CEO needs to ask Cameron et al again because...... we think he's lied to the British people on this? Fair enough, his lips were moving so I can see why people would think that but having already given a very public definitive answer why would he say anything different?


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 28, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, the White Paper has provided all the answers Scotland needed - hasn't it?

So if Westminster is arguing something different, it's them that needs to provide 'answers' surely!

Btw. This post doesn't mean I'm taking sides. Just trying to explain the issue/onus (hopefully) logically.
		
Click to expand...

Again, the White Paper hasn't provided answers, merely set out what Salmond would like to see happen.  As with the sterling zone, UK has said no!!  Of course, whether they actually mean no is a different question 

As this one area (FD beat me to it) that Westminster has commented on why on earth should the CEO of Standard Life ask them?  Should every individual and every Scottish company contact Cameron and Osborne?  Or, more loigically, should Salmond provde with them enough facts and a compelling case as to why they should vote Yes!!?


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But the CEO can check with Cameron and Osborne that what they have set is indeed set in stone or if it is political positioning.  Salmond is utterly unable to answer that question.  He can suggest that the C&O 'No Sterling Zone' is political posturing - but only C&O can tell the CEO the facts as THEY and ONLY THEY can determine whether a Sterling Zone will happen. * Salmond can only predict that it will*.
		
Click to expand...

Actually, no.

Salmond is the only person (or one of a few in reality) that is actually in a position to negoitiate with Westminster so that he isn't left with trying to "predict" what is going to happen.

For the life of me I don't know why you think he should sit back without providing any information or negotiating a more concrete position (on all aspects) where possible whilst Cameron and Osborne are left to shape an Independent Scotland!!?


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 28, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			...As with the sterling zone, UK has said no!!  Of course, whether they actually mean no is a different question 
...
		
Click to expand...

That's the issue that Salmond has to work around, or at least obfuscate!

Whether he can, and how he tries/does will be 'interesting'.

One thing he possibly has going for him is that the Joint Statements were actually organised by Alistair Darling, leader of the Better Together campaign. So a few fairly obvious 'favours' being called, as there was an intention, if not an agreement, to not pre-negotiate.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 28, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Actually, no.

Salmond is the only person (or one of a few in reality) that is actually in a position to negoitiate with Westminster so that he isn't left with trying to "predict" what is going to happen.

For the life of me I don't know why you think he should sit back without providing any information or negotiating a more concrete position (on all aspects) where possible whilst Cameron and Osborne are left to shape an Independent Scotland!!?
		
Click to expand...

But according to C&O there is no negotiation to be done - it's a no.  Indeed what C&O have done is kill the possibility of any pre-referendum negotiation that Salmond might have wanted to have with them, and that you are calling for him to have.  But then why would SL say that one of the risks is that Scotland won't be in a 'Sterling Zone' if they did not think it was still a possibility.


----------



## NWJocko (Feb 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But according to C&O there is no negotiation to be done - it's a no.  Indeed what C&O have done is kill the possibility of any pre-referendum negotiation that Salmond might have wanted to have with them, and that you are calling for him to have.  But then why would SL say that one of the risks is that Scotland won't be in a 'Sterling Zone' if they did not think it was still a possibility.
		
Click to expand...

Jeez its hard work!

I said negotiate on all aspects.

SL say uncertainty around currency, nothing to do with sterling zone.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 28, 2014)

Looks like BA have come out in support of a YES vote as the will get a better deal in iScotland.
Maybees we could persuade them to move their head office to Glasgow.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Looks like BA have come out in support of a YES vote as the will get a better deal in iScotland.
Maybees we could persuade them to move their head office to Glasgow.
		
Click to expand...

Better trying to get them to fly somewhere outside the uk from Scotland! Grrrr!


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Looks like BA have come out in support of a YES vote as the will get a better deal in iScotland.
Maybees we could persuade them to move their head office to Glasgow.
		
Click to expand...

Come on man! (How'd that South African expression sneak in?). They haven't said anything of the sort! You are dreaming!

Here's the Beeb's article. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26383990

Walsh stated 'if anything it might be marginally positive'.

That's ain't coming out in support of a YES vote in the slightest!

And the only reason he was asked was because it was their owner's AGM (I think) time! Indicates the same question will be asked of every company from or dealing with Scotland until September! Oh joy!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 28, 2014)

Willie's just thinking of all the money he could save if he moved his operation north of the border.
A bit like standard Life in reverse.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Willie's just thinking of all the money he could save if he moved his operation north of the border.
A bit like standard Life in reverse.
		
Click to expand...

What are you on (about)?


----------



## Val (Feb 28, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Better trying to get them to fly somewhere outside the uk from Scotland! Grrrr!
		
Click to expand...

They do, they fly to Ibiza, granted it's around 1am but it's a start. Be nice if could get a few long haul to the US from Edinburgh.


----------



## Andy808 (Mar 1, 2014)

Haven't they gone yet?
Oops sorry. When's the vote?


----------



## CMAC (Mar 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Looks like BA have come out in support of a YES vote as the will get a better deal in iScotland.
Maybees we could persuade them to move their head office to Glasgow.
		
Click to expand...




Foxholer said:



			Come on man! (How'd that South African expression sneak in?). *They haven't said anything of the sort! You are dreaming!*

Here's the Beeb's article. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26383990

Walsh stated 'if anything it might be marginally positive'.

That's ain't coming out in support of a YES vote in the slightest!

And the only reason he was asked was because it was their owner's AGM (I think) time! Indicates the same question will be asked of every company from or dealing with Scotland until September! Oh joy!
		
Click to expand...

Foxy is correct.

They are talking about the govt tax on flights, if that is scrapped for an iScotland it won't benefit Scotland, only BA


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 1, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Foxy is correct.

They are talking about the govt tax on flights, if that is scrapped for an iScotland it won't benefit Scotland, only BA
		
Click to expand...

Aye that's right, we don't want too many big spending tourists.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 1, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I was replying to Adi2's comment that it would be better if Standard Life left Scotland, not the Standard Life CEO's statement.
		
Click to expand...

All I meant was S&P's reference to over reliance on the financial sector and the SL announcement made for a easy resolution...was mothing but a throw away remark



CMAC said:



			Foxy is correct.

They are talking about the govt tax on flights, if that is scrapped for an iScotland it won't benefit Scotland, only BA
		
Click to expand...

Indeed.Who needs more intercontinental direct routes,opening new markets of trade,tourism and co-operation.I work in the industry and I guarantee more long haul routes (esp to BRIC please) would help the economy significantly, as witnessed by Emirates (now double daily) and Qatar from May


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Indeed.Who needs more intercontinental direct routes,opening new markets of trade,tourism and co-operation.I work in the industry and I guarantee more long haul routes (esp to BRIC please) would help the economy significantly, as witnessed by Emirates (now double daily) and Qatar from May
		
Click to expand...

It would seem from his 'marginally positive' statement Willy either doesn't believe it will dramatically change things - *for BA* - or is adopting a 'wait and see' approach.

By no means the 'coming out in support' that Doon sugested!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			It would seem from his 'marginally positive' statement Willy either doesn't believe it will dramatically change things - *for BA* - or is adopting a 'wait and see' approach.

By no means the 'coming out in support' that Doon sugested!
		
Click to expand...

I agree.Both the BA statement and the SL statement are adopting a wait and see approach with both companies engaging in scenarios depending on which way Scotland votes, so lets use common sense and say so and not totally over blow what either company says,eh?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			What are you on (about)?

Click to expand...

Slightly tongue in cheek comment to balance thoughts.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I agree.Both the BA statement and the SL statement are adopting a wait and see approach with both companies engaging in scenarios depending on which way Scotland votes, so lets use common sense and say so and not totally over blow what either company says,eh?
		
Click to expand...

Well, asked if they were making contingency plans for (possible) independence, Walsh stated "No, because we'll continue to fly to Scotland."

As for common sense, I believe that should be directed at Doon - which was what me 'Come on man..' was about!

Does look likely that at every interview/press conference with CEO the 'are you making contingency plans?' question will be asked with a view to manufacturing a headline out of the response! But that's what the Media does and CEOs have to 'counter' - or at least bear in mind before they reply.



Doon frae Troon said:



			Slightly tongue in cheek comment to balance thoughts.
		
Click to expand...

You should consider the use of Smilies then!


----------



## CMAC (Mar 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Aye that's right, we don't want too many big spending tourists.
		
Click to expand...

totally baffled with the logic or direction of this point


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 1, 2014)

CMAC said:



			totally baffled with the logic or direction of this point

Click to expand...

Needed one of these....


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 2, 2014)

Reduced airport taxes in iScotland = better trading opportunities for airlines = additional tourists for Scotland


----------



## CMAC (Mar 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Reduced airport taxes in iScotland = better trading opportunities for airlines = additional tourists for Scotland
		
Click to expand...

wouldn't the taxes be reduced if you are flying OOT of iScotland while you are still being heavily taxed at t'other end:mmm:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 2, 2014)

It would still give Edinburgh/Glasgow a trading advantage over Newcastle/East Midlands


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 2, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			It would seem from his 'marginally positive' statement Willy either doesn't believe it will dramatically change things - *for BA* - or is adopting a 'wait and see' approach.

By no means the 'coming out in support' that Doon sugested!
		
Click to expand...

But you know what the headline would have been if WW had made a 'marginally negative' statement. 'Another major corporate raises concerns about blah further weakening the YES blah'

And so it goes.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 2, 2014)

That's right Hogan.
As far as the 'British' press is concerned it is very one sided.
It does not reflect the mood of the Scottish nation at the moment.

But there again that's the press, their only interest is selling papers and few papers are sold in Scotland.
We tend get our news online. Especially if you live in remote areas when the morning paper arrives mid afternoon.


----------



## Spuddy (Mar 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			wouldn't the taxes be reduced if you are flying OOT of iScotland while you are still being heavily taxed at t'other end:mmm:
		
Click to expand...

APD is a departure tax so visitors from Europe/USA won't pay anything.  The only people who do will be folk flying up from what's left of the UK.

The airlines know how much they can charge for tickets on certain routes before it becomes too expensive.  They're moaning because at the moment, APD is eating into the profit margin.  Without it, the ticket prices won't go down much (if at all), it's just that the airlines will make more money.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 2, 2014)

So this thread advances towards the 1000 mark!   Has anyone changed their view?


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 2, 2014)

Spuddy said:



			APD is a departure tax so visitors from Europe/USA won't pay anything.  The only people who do will be folk flying up from what's left of the UK.
		
Click to expand...

Not on the way into Scotland (or UK for that matter). 

But on the way back, they will pay it (unless within 24hrs of arrival) as they are departing!



Spuddy said:



			The airlines know how much they can charge for tickets on certain routes before it becomes too expensive.  They're moaning because at the moment, APD is eating into the profit margin.  Without it, the ticket prices won't go down much (if at all), it's just that the airlines will make more money.
		
Click to expand...

I agree, at least for high tariff fares.

For the likes of Ryanair, there will be quite a reduction, though I also don't believe it will be the full amount.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 3, 2014)

Interview with Sir Angus Grossart in Business Section of yesterday's Sunday Times.  In 1969 he set up Scotland's first merchant bank and if anything happens in the financial sector in Scotland he knows about it.  He was also on the board of RBS for 20yrs until 2005 and was a colleague of Fred Goodwin.

His view? quoting from the ST article




			He does not believe the stories of threats.  He is much more sanguine: a solution to all the big concerns will simply have to be found if Scotland votes for separation (he says) "If you avoid absolutist views of independence or the union you find...there are substantial areas of movement and consensus.  Pragmatism will emerge"  He will "be more than willing to help any government in Westminster or Holyrood make Scotland function"
		
Click to expand...

So take from that as little or as much as you wish from one of Scotland's top financiers.  But he's certainly recognising that a lot of what is currently being said as political rhetoric and not the final word on the matter.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 3, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Interview with Sir Angus Grossart in Business Section of yesterday's Sunday Times.  In 1969 he set up Scotland's first merchant bank and if anything happens in the financial sector in Scotland he knows about it.  *He was also on the board of RBS for 20yrs until 2005 and was a colleague of Fred Goodwin.*

Click to expand...

It was going so well until then! :rofl: Though RBS was almost certainly in better shape in 2005 than in 2008/9



SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But he's certainly recognising that a lot of what is currently being said as political rhetoric and not the final word on the matter.
		
Click to expand...

I would have thought significantly more than 'a lot'.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 3, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			It was going so well until then! :rofl: Though RBS was almost certainly in better shape in 2005 than in 2008/9



I would have thought significantly more than 'a lot'.
		
Click to expand...

I had to add the RBS bit as otherwise I would have been accused of hiding some of the facts on his background in the article  - though what role he had in the whole mess who knows.  But that said does not change the gist of what he was saying.


----------



## CMAC (Mar 3, 2014)

I vote this thread is cont as part 2 as over 21,000 posts must be clogging up the forum and no-one will look back...unless they have to. So Mods, worth locking this thread and continuing a new one appropriately worded?


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 4, 2014)

If there is a YES vote I hope we can keep Carol Kirkwood!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 4, 2014)

I think she is in the 'Hogan' camp.

You should see oor BBC Scotland weather girls, one is extremely scarey, you would not want to tell her she got the forecast wrong.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 4, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			If there is a YES vote I hope we can keep Carol Kirkwood! 

Click to expand...

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgr...J4FvsotHRCM:&docid=txMGDeL7DH1emM&h=576&w=700

Makes Anne Robinson look like the Tooth Fairy


----------



## Val (Mar 4, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			If there is a YES vote I hope we can keep Carol Kirkwood! 

Click to expand...

You're a sick man 

All she delivers is bad news daily.


----------



## Val (Mar 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think she is in the 'Hogan' camp.

You should see oor BBC Scotland weather girls, one is extremely scarey, you would not want to tell her she got the forecast wrong.
		
Click to expand...

Oh, would that be Judith Ralston?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 4, 2014)

Sunny at Inverewe again.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Oh, would that be Judith Ralston? 






Click to expand...

I really fancy her


----------



## ger147 (Mar 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I really fancy her
		
Click to expand...

You need to get out more


----------



## Val (Mar 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I really fancy her
		
Click to expand...

Have you lost your dog and white stick?



ger147 said:



			You need to get out more 

Click to expand...

Couldnt agree more


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 4, 2014)

ger147 said:



			You need to get out more 

Click to expand...




Valentino said:



			Have you lost your dog and white stick?



Couldnt agree more
		
Click to expand...

How very dare you.I reckon she'd be,ahem, 'demanding' in certain scenarios and some of us like that.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 4, 2014)

I miss Heather the Weather.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think she is in the 'Hogan' camp.

You should see oor BBC Scotland weather girls, one is extremely scarey, you would not want to tell her she got the forecast wrong.
		
Click to expand...

Well it would be a bit of a squeeze and I think I'd notice.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You're a sick man 

All she delivers is bad news daily.
		
Click to expand...

Who notices the weather when Carols on the Telly ! 

View attachment 9372


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 4, 2014)

Ok SR.

We will negotiate Carol for Berwick on Tweed.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Ok SR.

We will negotiate Carol for Berwick on Tweed.
		
Click to expand...

Not Berwick but you can have Paxo!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 4, 2014)

What on earth would we want with chicken stuffing when we can't afford chicken in Scotland


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			What on earth would we want with chicken stuffing when we can't afford chicken in Scotland
		
Click to expand...

 Paxman


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 4, 2014)

Only joshing!

Tell you what, we will give you Kelso if you keep him.

Mind some part of me thinks folk would pay a fortune to see Pax'mon's attempt of trying to interview Alex Salmond again. 
I'm thinking stadium venues here.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Only joshing!

Tell you what, we will give you Kelso if you keep him.

Mind some part of me thinks folk would pay a fortune to see Pax'mon's attempt of trying to interview Alex Salmond again. 
I'm thinking stadium venues here.
		
Click to expand...

Hadn't seen that before http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akfN7bO_2Bc

Probably could be shown if the 'Yes' ever want to sway another few percent across to their view!

Though it would be difficult for my opinion of Paxman to sink any lower, but it has!

We'll take Kelso as long as it comes with Roxburghe Golf Course  The viaduct might just be put to an alternative use!


----------



## CMAC (Mar 4, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I vote this thread is cont as part 2 as over 21,000 posts must be clogging up the forum and no-one will look back...unless they have to. So Mods, worth locking this thread and continuing a new one appropriately worded?
		
Click to expand...

so thats a maybe then:smirk:

Scottish weather girls are too masculine, Carol whatshername is twee pasty and wobbly and sooo unatractive, and to read the local news on Scotland you need to have a speech impediment or unfortunate twitch


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 5, 2014)

CMAC said:



			so thats a maybe then:smirk:

Scottish weather girls are too masculine, Carol whatshername is twee pasty and wobbly and sooo unatractive, and to read the local news on Scotland you need to have a speech impediment or unfortunate twitch

Click to expand...

Wouldn't climb over her to get to you !


----------



## Val (Mar 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			How very dare you.I reckon she'd be,ahem, 'demanding' in certain scenarios and some of us like that.
		
Click to expand...

I suppose you could argue looking like her you cant knock back anything


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Ok SR.

We will negotiate Carol for Berwick on Tweed.
		
Click to expand...


Deal... 
Not sure everyone north of the wall would be happy though... 
Would it mean Scotland having to declare war on Russia?


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 5, 2014)

CMAC said:



			so thats a maybe then:smirk:

Scottish weather girls are too masculine, Carol whatshername is twee pasty and wobbly and sooo unatractive, and to read the local news on Scotland you need to have a speech impediment or unfortunate twitch

Click to expand...

Surely to god you can't be including Gillian Smart in that assessment.


----------



## CMAC (Mar 5, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Surely to god you can't be including Gillian Smart in that assessment.
		
Click to expand...

She's quite nice.......in a mumsy way:smirk:

I did however see a pretty attractive blonde reading the news this morning, don't know her name but things are looking up.


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 5, 2014)

CMAC said:



			She's quite nice.......in a mumsy way:smirk:

I did however see a pretty attractive blonde reading the news this morning, don't know her name but things are looking up.
		
Click to expand...

Mummsy? How old are you? oo:


----------



## CMAC (Mar 5, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Mummsy? How old are you? oo: 

Click to expand...

mumsy is mumsy no matter what age you are


----------



## nemicu (Mar 5, 2014)

As long as we're still allowed to play Turnberry, I couldn't give a monkeys. The same goes for the Welsh and Tenby, and the other lot and Royal County Down.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 6, 2014)

And now BBC are reporting that Shell boss has apparently said 'he wants Scotland to stay in UK'.

Haven't read what he really said (so may have to agree when I do) but my initial thoughts from other Beeb articles - and the selective quotes - are that he said nothing of the sort! it was merely a BBC journalist's report that took that attitude. If that is the case - and I stress that I may need to adjust my opinion later - then it's quite scary that such an 'independent' news organisation is taking such a biased stance. Who knows what rubbish we are being fed on unverifiable stuff!

I will check, hopefully having to adjust my current distrust, when I return!


----------



## Imurg (Mar 6, 2014)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...d-Lloyds-warn-Scotland-over-independence.html

The Telegraqph are saying the same thing.

And he uses the word "we" rather than "I" - implying that this is a Corporate policy rather than a personal wish...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 6, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And now BBC are reporting that Shell boss has apparently said 'he wants Scotland to stay in UK'.

Haven't read what he really said (so may have to agree when I do) but my initial thoughts from other Beeb articles - and the selective quotes - are that he said nothing of the sort! it was merely a BBC journalist's report that took that attitude. If that is the case - and I stress that I may need to adjust my opinion later - then it's quite scary that such an 'independent' news organisation is taking such a biased stance. Who knows what rubbish we are being fed on unverifiable stuff!

I will check and confirm later!
		
Click to expand...

Boss of Shell is largely concerned with uncertainty - and so to a greater degree he will be concerned about whether UK stays in the EU (whether Scotland is in UK or not) come an EU referendum.  So with the Scottish referendum the big companies are in fact just rehearsing their risk concerns in advance of the EU referendum.  

Of course as predicted on such matters the view of the boss of Shell is presented as 'another serious blow to the YES campaign'.  When in fact Shell aren't saying anything more than Scotland leaving the UK is currently higher uncertainty than the status quo - which is rather stating the obvious but is nonetheless a fact.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 6, 2014)

Imurg said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...d-Lloyds-warn-Scotland-over-independence.html

The Telegraqph are saying the same thing.

And he uses the word "we" rather than "I" - implying that this is a Corporate policy rather than a personal wish...
		
Click to expand...

Well to misquote 'they would, wouldn't they'!

Lon ago realised not to expect 'the whole truth' from Newspapers, especially UK ones. Telegraph is little more than a 'snobby Daily Mail', imo, though it's my paper of choice - for Sport and the Crossword! Oh and for Matt and Alex!


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Mar 6, 2014)

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but saw a piece on the BBC (so could well be biased, as above), stating that the Banks would have to move their HQ's down to England/rUK if there were a split, due to EU legislation about being based where the majority of the Business occurs.

Does that affect anything for you pro-Yes'ers?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 6, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but saw a piece on the BBC (so could well be biased, as above), stating that the Banks would have to move their HQ's down to England/rUK if there were a split, due to EU legislation about being based where the majority of the Business occurs.

Does that affect anything for you pro-Yes'ers?
		
Click to expand...

That is a biggy.
EU ruling that the banks headquarters should be in the country where it does the most business. Court ruling in 1995 seemingly.
This affects Lloyds and RBS.
Basically means that the debts of those banks will be moved to that country. Nat West is bigger than RBS in the UK and their headquarters will be moved to England.
iScotland would lose the debt of Lloyds and RBS and probably the finance jobs.

The National BBC is getting to the stage where you just can't trust a word it says on the debate.
The BBC Scotland political correspondent is about the only one with any credibility. I don't suppose you get the opportunity to hear him in rUK.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			iScotland would lose the debt of Lloyds and RBS and probably the finance jobs.
		
Click to expand...

What makes you say that - I don't see how either would necessarily follow? Not saying you're wrong, just interested.



Doon frae Troon said:



			The National BBC is getting to the stage where you just can't trust a word it says on the debate.
The BBC Scotland political correspondent is about the only one with any credibility. I don't suppose you get the opportunity to hear him in rUK.
		
Click to expand...

Can't say I've noticed a particular bias in the BBC. Admittedly they sometimes say stuff the "yes" campaign doesn't like but that's not the same thing. I listen to Radio Scotland most mornings and seem to be getting quite impartial info with pluses and minuses for both sides.

Got any links demonstrating bias?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That is a biggy.
EU ruling that the banks headquarters should be in the country where it does the most business. Court ruling in 1995 seemingly.
This affects Lloyds and RBS.
Basically means that the debts of those banks will be moved to that country. Nat West is bigger than RBS in the UK and their headquarters will be moved to England.
iScotland would lose the debt of Lloyds and RBS and probably the finance jobs.

The National BBC is getting to the stage where you just can't trust a word it says on the debate.
The BBC Scotland political correspondent is about the only one with any credibility. I don't suppose you get the opportunity to hear him in rUK.
		
Click to expand...

Though listening to BBC Radio Scotland this morning (as I sometimes do if there is a significant piece of news in respect of the referendum) the view given was that even if the banks had to move their HQ (to London) then most of the jobs would remain in Scotland - I think Lloyds would be able to stay in Scotland for a reason I didn't quite hear - but probably tied to the TSB.  I believe that the EU ruling was brought in to prevent banks moving their HQ from their base and where their customers are simply for taxation 'minimisation' (read avoidance) purposes.  Though the report I heard indicated that the legislation has not been tested and was certainly not aimed at the iScotland scenario.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Though listening to BBC Radio Scotland this morning (as I sometimes do if there is a significant piece of news in respect of the referendum) the view given was that even if the banks had to move their HQ (to London) then most of the jobs would remain in Scotland - I think Lloyds would be able to stay in Scotland for a reason I didn't quite hear - but probably tied to the TSB.  I believe that the EU ruling was brought in to prevent banks moving their HQ from their base and where their customers are simply for taxation 'minimisation' (read avoidance) purposes.  Though the report I heard indicated that the legislation has not been tested and was certainly not aimed at the iScotland scenario.
		
Click to expand...

I think with Lloyds it's a case that having their HQ up here is purely symbolic anyway, a condition of the HBoS takeover. The BBC view was that the only actual change would be the gold plaque from the building on the Mound would need to move south.

What really interested me on this legislation was that the HQ should be in the territory where the bank does most of its business. So, if Barclays (say) made major inroads in China would it have to move? Effectively no bank could be successful in a larger market than where it was domiciled?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 6, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			What makes you say that - I don't see how either would necessarily follow? Not saying you're wrong, just interested.
		
Click to expand...

As I pressed the send button I remembered the UK taxpayer has a big holding in both banks. 
Could get messy.

The use of we [or even England] when referring to rUK generally goes unnoticed by most.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Boss of Shell is largely concerned with uncertainty - and so to a greater degree he will be concerned about whether UK stays in the EU (whether Scotland is in UK or not) come an EU referendum.  So with the Scottish referendum the big companies are in fact just rehearsing their risk concerns in advance of the EU referendum.  

Of course as predicted on such matters the view of the boss of Shell is presented as 'another serious blow to the YES campaign'.  When in fact Shell aren't saying anything more than Scotland leaving the UK is currently higher uncertainty than the status quo - which is rather stating the obvious but is nonetheless a fact.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed, having been able to check out other sources, what was really stated was virtually the same (less) 'risk' issue that Standard Life and others have made contingency plans. To be absolutely fair to those reporting, the Shell Boss did actually mention 'prefer Scotland to continue to be part of UK', something others haven't done, so there was a headline to be made. Nothing new in that approach. But still extremely unimpressed how Beeb Journalist/Editor corrupts that statement by changing 'prefer' to 'wants'! Another nail in the coffin of any view of the BBC as 'independent'! And, if we can detect bias on things we know about, the sinister part is how much 'corruption' of events is there in areas where we know much less about!

As for the movement of RBS and Lloyds HOs to South of the border, that is potentially already under way - as other reports have detailed. The, seemingly truly unbiased, independent (as would be expected) S&P report shows that may have benefits as well as perceived disadvantages. Should be neutral from UK/rUK's point of view.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 6, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			...
What really interested me on this legislation was that the HQ should be in the territory where the bank does most of its business. So, if Barclays (say) made major inroads in China would it have to move? Effectively no bank could be successful in a larger market than where it was domiciled?
		
Click to expand...

That ridiculous consequence of that directive was what struck me too.

And several large European Banks almost certainly 'fail' that test already. However, they will have ways of dealing with that anyway - the 'Group' function/entity being the obvious one. It does prevent them all moving their registered offices to Luxembourg though!

When that EU directive cam in, there was quite a bit of scare-mongering in (City of) London that it was a proposal to weaken the City's dominance - over Frankfurt and Paris. But nothing really changed in that regard - certainly little that was visible!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 6, 2014)

Funny how this has been on the back boiler for 9 years, but raises it's head now.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)




----------



## Foxholer (Mar 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Funny how this has been on the back boiler for 9 years, but raises it's head now.
		
Click to expand...

9 Years? Don't you mean 29 years?

It's only relevant (nothing 'back boiler' about it) now because some 'UK Banks' may cease to be domiciled UK!


----------



## CMAC (Mar 6, 2014)

I see 'Seen Canary' has come out with; 
an independent Scotland is an opportunity "too good to miss" and ending the union with England would help boost artistic creation north of their common border.

The Scottish-born star, 83, spoke out six months before a referendum that could split the United Kingdom. A long-term supporter of separation, the Bahamas resident has said he could return to his native land if it became independent.

now is that a good or bad thing


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



View attachment 9406

Click to expand...

Raise the level of your chat, because that's terrible.Most of them have either been proven to have been misquoted,didn't say anything of the sort or have been proven wrong.

Must do better LiverpoolPhil


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I see 'Seen Canary' has come out with; 
an independent Scotland is an opportunity "too good to miss" and ending the union with England would help boost artistic creation north of their common border.

The Scottish-born star, 83, spoke out six months before a referendum that could split the United Kingdom. A long-term supporter of separation, the Bahamas resident has said he could return to his native land if it became independent.

now is that a good or bad thing
		
Click to expand...

anyone who takes the slightest notice of Sean Connery,Davie Bowie,that laddie from Dr Who or any other non-resident egotist should have their voting rights removed.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Raise the level of your chat, because that's terrible.Most of them have either been proven to have been misquoted,didn't say anything of the sort or have been proven wrong.

Must do better LiverpoolPhil
		
Click to expand...


Sorry you're right - must add Shell :thup:

I have noticed when a misquote is positive towards the yes vote it has been taken as gospel a number of times though :thup:


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			anyone who takes the slightest notice of Sean Connery,Davie Bowie,that laddie from Dr Who or any other non-resident egotist should have their voting rights removed.
		
Click to expand...

Can they be banned from posting on the "Independence" threads in the forum too....?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Sorry you're right - must add Shell :thup:

I have noticed when a misquote is positive towards the yes vote it has been taken as gospel a number of times though :thup:
		
Click to expand...





I take nothing I read on any forum as gospel btw.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

So BBC are saying Shell want Scotland to stay part of the Uk and it appears that the Shell boss has said they want Scotland to stay part of the UK


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So BBC are saying Shell want Scotland to stay part of the Uk and it appears that the Shell boss has said they want Scotland to stay part of the UK 

Click to expand...

It's about the use of the word stability and the suggestion that would not be the case post yes.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



View attachment 9413


I take nothing I read on any forum as gospel btw.
		
Click to expand...

OK, so I had to zoom in and still found your picture hard to read but, if I got it correctly it said....

BBC reported that the shell boss *wants* Scotland to stay in the UK while he actually said that they'd *like* Scotland to stay in the UK.

I'm finding it hard to spot the distinction?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It's about the use of the word stability and the suggestion that would not be the case post yes.
		
Click to expand...


But the BBC weren't wrong though - Shell do want Scotland to stay part of the Uk - yes ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			But the BBC weren't wrong though - Shell do want Scotland to stay part of the Uk - yes ?
		
Click to expand...

The BBC used the word stability in reference to Scotland when shell used it in reference to Europe, so no, the BBC were not right


----------



## CMAC (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			anyone who takes the slightest notice of Sean Connery,Davie Bowie,that laddie from Dr Who or any other non-resident egotist should have their voting rights removed.
		
Click to expand...




FairwayDodger said:



			Can they be banned from posting on the "Independence" threads in the forum too....?  

Click to expand...

as you both have taken notice does that include you

:mmm:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The BBC used the word stability in reference to Scotland when shell used it in reference to Europe, so no, the BBC were not right
		
Click to expand...

That a bit "nit picking" though isn't 

The overall sentiment is Shell would like Scotland to stay as part of the UK ? Yes ? 

A massive company that is directly involved in billion pound income as well as thousand of jobs - would like Scotland to stay as part of the UK - are people focusing on the use of one word to cloud over what Shell would like


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 6, 2014)

CMAC said:



			as you both have taken notice does that include you

:mmm:
		
Click to expand...

Blast!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



*That a bit "nit picking" though isn't *

The overall sentiment is Shell would like Scotland to stay as part of the UK ? Yes ? 

A massive company that is directly involved in billion pound income as well as thousand of jobs - would like Scotland to stay as part of the UK - are people focusing on the use of one word to cloud over what Shell would like
		
Click to expand...

Possibly.But inferring a lack of stability in iScotland is bollocks and should be called so.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Possibly.But inferring a lack of stability in iScotland is bollocks and should be called so.
		
Click to expand...


Well it might be unstable if a yes vote occurs though ?

Either way it's a nothing worry and your main worry is what Shell have said


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Well it might be unstable if a yes vote occurs though ?

Either way it's a nothing worry and your main worry is what Shell have said
		
Click to expand...


I can't think of any scenario where indy Scotland could be unstable, but _might_ covers a whole range of things so I'll have to agree.

I have no worries about what Shell have to say...if they want to leave Scotland and the oil then jog on, someone else (ideally a nationalised scottish company) will make huge profits from our oil.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I can't think of any scenario where indy Scotland could be unstable, but _might_ covers a whole range of things so I'll have to agree.

I have no worries about what Shell have to say...if they want to leave Scotland and the oil then jog on, someone else (ideally a nationalised scottish company) will make huge profits from our oil.
		
Click to expand...

Which company is that ?

And your oil ?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I can't think of any scenario where indy Scotland could be unstable, but _might_ covers a whole range of things so I'll have to agree.

I have no worries about what Shell have to say...if they want to leave Scotland and the oil then jog on, someone else (ideally a nationalised scottish company) will make huge profits from our oil.
		
Click to expand...

Do you mean the oil that, according to many industry experts, is a fast diminishing resource?

Whether the vote is YES or NO this really is an issue that Holyrood or Westminster is going to have to face up to honestly. 

For far too long the oil & gas reserves have been viewed by politicians, North and South of the border, as if they will last forever when it now seems clear that their future is not long term.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 6, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			OK, so I had to zoom in and still found your picture hard to read but, if I got it correctly it said....

BBC reported that the shell boss *wants* Scotland to stay in the UK while he actually said that they'd *like* Scotland to stay in the UK.

I'm finding it hard to spot the distinction?
		
Click to expand...

I'd say the words for increasing levels of preference are -- don't mind/care; would like/prefer; want/desire; need essential
And the slope is pretty even imo.

So to use a higher level than the one is another example of slanted reporting imo.

Here's a link to a Reuters article - similarly slanted/biased imo http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/06/uk-scotland-independence-shel-idUKBREA250GA20140306 The statement about 'gathering chorus' should at least state that the chorus was about the risks (to the business) because of the uncertainty.

And there will be loads more of these - avery AGM of a shared company - so the 'Yes' needs to get a simple standard answer to combat them!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			But the BBC weren't wrong though - Shell do want Scotland to stay part of the Uk - yes ?
		
Click to expand...

According to BBC Scotland news tonight I think they'd *prefer *Scotland to remain part of the UK - and the UK to remain part of the EU.  There's quite a difference between wanting something and preferring to have it.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The overall sentiment is Shell would like Scotland to stay as part of the UK ? Yes ? 

A massive company that is directly involved in billion pound income as well as thousand of jobs - would like Scotland to stay as part of the UK - are people focusing on the use of one word to cloud over what Shell would like
		
Click to expand...

I believe you are misinterpreting why Shell, or any other business, would like Scotland to continue to be part of UK.

It is purely based on the (selfish) risk of cost to the business! And that's the same as every business that has and will comment on possible independence. 

Virtually every business tries to avoid, or at least minimise 'uncertainty and risk to their business'. The Independence vote is something that many businesses will have to consider because if a 'Yes' result happens, there will be 'uncertainty and risk to their business'. So because they prefer no risk/uncertainty - and the associated cost - they naturally prefer the status quo - about anything!

From a business perspective, they almost certainly don't really give a toss whether Scotland is independent or not, but if it involves uncertainty and risk to their business they will prefer 'no change' and/but will make (contingency) plans to mitigate any risk.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Which company is that ?

And your oil ?
		
Click to expand...

re:company, dunno,a newy formed, govt owned stateoil?And aye,Scotlands oil.



MetalMickie said:



			Do you mean the oil that, according to many industry experts, is a fast diminishing resource?

Whether the vote is YES or NO this really is an issue that Holyrood or Westminster is going to have to face up to honestly. 

For far too long the oil & gas reserves have been viewed by politicians, North and South of the border, as if they will last forever when it now seems clear that their future is not long term.
		
Click to expand...

Not seven days ago Davie Cameron was licking arse in Aberdeen, proclaiming the start of a new oil boom, worth Â£2 trillion.Now, off course its diminishing, but there's more left than we're taken out already, and then add on the stuff west of shetland and the stuff in the clyde basin.

So, Norway started an oil fund in the early 90's, which is now worth more than the oil that funded it and will technically, never run out and makes each and every Norwegian citizen a $ millionaire.Recently they had to create anew bank to take on some of the 'burden' of their fund because it was too big for one bank!...so lets be honest, themain reason that westminster has formed the most unholy alliance is because of our oil...it funds loads.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 6, 2014)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBDa0e9CLuY&feature=kp


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			re:company, dunno,a newy formed, govt owned stateoil?And aye,Scotlands oil.



Not seven days ago Davie Cameron was licking arse in Aberdeen, proclaiming the start of a new oil boom, worth Â£2 trillion.Now, off course its diminishing, but there's more left than we're taken out already, and then add on the stuff west of shetland and the stuff in the clyde basin.

So, Norway started an oil fund in the early 90's, which is now worth more than the oil that funded it and will technically, never run out and makes each and every Norwegian citizen a $ millionaire.Recently they had to create anew bank to take on some of the 'burden' of their fund because it was too big for one bank!...so lets be honest, themain reason that westminster has formed the most unholy alliance is because of our oil...it funds loads.
		
Click to expand...

Well OPEC for one completely disagrees with your optimistic view of both the North Sea reserves and the viability of developing new fields around Scotland.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			re:company, dunno,a newy formed, govt owned stateoil?And aye,Scotlands oil.



Not seven days ago Davie Cameron was licking arse in Aberdeen, proclaiming the start of a new oil boom, worth Â£2 trillion.Now, off course its diminishing, but there's more left than we're taken out already, and then add on the stuff west of shetland and the stuff in the clyde basin.

So, Norway started an oil fund in the early 90's, which is now worth more than the oil that funded it and will technically, never run out and makes each and every Norwegian citizen a $ millionaire.Recently they had to create anew bank to take on some of the 'burden' of their fund because it was too big for one bank!...so lets be honest, themain reason that westminster has formed the most unholy alliance is because of our oil...it funds loads.
		
Click to expand...

Didnt realise it was Scotlands Oil - when did that happen ?

So there isnt actually a company in Scotland to farm the oil ? Another thing that would need created.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Didnt realise it was Scotlands Oil - when did that happen ?

So there isnt actually a company in Scotland to farm the oil ? Another thing that would need created.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where your going with this.The oil is in Scottish waters, if/when we vote yes, it'll be ours.

And creating companies that require jobs isn't a bad thing...but thats just my preference, I'm a fan of the mondragon principles


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not sure where your going with this.The oil is in Scottish waters, if/when we vote yes, it'll be ours.

And creating companies that require jobs isn't a bad thing...but thats just my preference, I'm a fan of the mondragon principles
		
Click to expand...

So wont we get a portion of the oil just as Scotland appear to want a portion of everything currently owned by the UK ?

I belive its currently UK oil in UK waters and no boundaries have been set ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Well OPEC for one completely disagrees with your optimistic view of both the North Sea reserves and the viability of developing new fields around Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

So who do you believe?Opec or Cameron?...and as for OPEC, I'm not sure if they're the best source of info...they say oil is running out in an area they have no governance to make them look more attractive?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So wont we get a portion of the oil just as Scotland appear to want a portion of everything currently owned by the UK ?

I belive its currently UK oil in UK waters and no boundaries have been set ?
		
Click to expand...

I'm not going to entertain this...would Scotland get a share of the city of london?

Be sensible.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not going to entertain this...would Scotland get a share of the city of london?

Be sensible.
		
Click to expand...

Im surprised if that isnt in Salmonds white paper. The point is there is lots of presumptions of what will happen IF there is a Yes vote - but no one including yourself will actually know what will happen. The oil could end up being shred between us and yourselves - plus lots and lots of other permetations  - nothing is set in stone.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Didnt realise it was Scotlands Oil - when did that happen ?
		
Click to expand...

While you were 'on holiday'? Welcome back! you seem to be making up for lost time!

@MetalMickie What makes you say that about OPEC?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			While you were 'on holiday'? Welcome back! you seem to be making up for lost time!

@MetalMickie What makes you say that about OPEC?
		
Click to expand...


Cheers - only been told i have racist behaviour and uneducated social skills so far - so its not too bad a day


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Im surprised if that isnt in Salmonds white paper. The point is there is lots of presumptions of what will happen IF there is a Yes vote - but no one including yourself will actually know what will happen. The oil could end up being shred between us and yourselves - plus lots and lots of other permetations  - nothing is set in stone.
		
Click to expand...

OK.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Cheers - only been told i have racist behaviour and uneducated social skills so far - so its not too bad a day
		
Click to expand...

Add a complete lack of a grip on reality to that list!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Add a complete lack of a grip on reality to that list!
		
Click to expand...


As opposed to being a fantasist :thup:

Come September i expect imo you will get a good smack of reality to bring you right down to earth - interesting to see how you cope with a NO vote as you appear so utterly desperate to be away from the English.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Cheers - only been told i have racist behaviour and uneducated social skills so far - so its not too bad a day
		
Click to expand...

Seem pretty 'argumentative' to me!:rofl:

PS. It's perm*u*tations. Higgorant squaddie!:rofl:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			As opposed to being a fantasist :thup:

Come September i expect imo you will get a good smack of reality to bring you right down to earth - interesting to see how you cope with a NO vote as you appear so utterly desperate to be away from the English.
		
Click to expand...

And herein lies the problem and preconceived idea that this is about getting away from the english.This is nothing to do with the welsh or irish or the english, but everything to do with the scottish.the problem for you is attempting to understand its not about you.And I think you'll struggle to understand that.

I also accept my side is behind and the chances are we'll lose.But that'll not stop me trying to win.I'll be gutted if we lose and you'll be smug, but if we win i'll not give you a second thought and you'll be gutted.thats the difference.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Seem pretty 'argumentative' to me!:rofl:

PS. It's perm*u*tations. higgorant squaddie!:rofl:
		
Click to expand...


Yeah thats the word i was looking for


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			And herein lies the problem and preconceived idea that this is about getting away from the english.This is nothing to do with the welsh or irish or the english, but everything to do with the scottish.the problem for you is attempting to understand its not about you.And I think you'll struggle to understand that.

I also accept my side is behind and the chances are we'll lose.But that'll not stop me trying to win.I'll be gutted if we lose and you'll be smug, but if we win i'll not give you a second thought and you'll be gutted.thats the difference.
		
Click to expand...

I wont be gutted or smug - i am sad that people want to break up such a strong alliance that has held together through modern history.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			While you were 'on holiday'? Welcome back! you seem to be making up for lost time!

@MetalMickie What makes you say that about OPEC?
		
Click to expand...

Report in Daily Telegraph Business approx 3-4 weeks ago. Was not particularly positive towards oil production/demand in general and specific in their pessimism for North Sea.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 7, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So who do you believe?Opec or Cameron?...and as for OPEC, I'm not sure if they're the best source of info...they say oil is running out in an area they have no governance to make them look more attractive?
		
Click to expand...

I have respect for many of the views you have expressed in this debate but here you appear to have fallen into the same trap as many in the YES camp i.e. selective quotation and reference only to those statements that support your argument.


OPEC are not alone, I believe, in their concerns.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 7, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			I have respect for many of the views you have expressed in this debate but here you appear to have fallen into the same trap as many in the YES camp i.e. selective quotation and reference only to those statements that support your argument.


OPEC are not alone, I believe, in their concerns.
		
Click to expand...

So was Cameroonian telling us porkies when he visited Aberdeen?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So was Cameroonian telling us porkies when he visited Aberdeen?
		
Click to expand...

Quite possibly in much the same way that Wee 'Eck does. After all they are both politicians and they would call it spin not lies.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So was Cameroonian telling us porkies when he visited Aberdeen?
		
Click to expand...

Were his lips moving?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I believe you are misinterpreting why Shell, or any other business, would like Scotland to continue to be part of UK.

It is purely based on the (selfish) risk of cost to the business! And that's the same as every business that has and will comment on possible independence. 

Virtually every business tries to avoid, or at least minimise 'uncertainty and risk to their business'. The Independence vote is something that many businesses will have to consider because if a 'Yes' result happens, there will be 'uncertainty and risk to their business'. So because they prefer no risk/uncertainty - and the associated cost - they naturally prefer the status quo - about anything!

From a business perspective, they almost certainly don't really give a toss whether Scotland is independent or not, but if it involves uncertainty and risk to their business they will prefer 'no change' and/but will make (contingency) plans to mitigate any risk.
		
Click to expand...

Oh a man to my 'risky' heart.  Indeed many major businesses will consider it important for them to state their recognition that a risk with an iScotland exists - as much because their duty of care to their shareholders and duty to maximise their returns demands they do.  If they didn't make such a statement the markets might decide that the company wasn't actively assessing the risk and determining the mitigation and contingency plans.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 7, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			re:company, dunno,a newy formed, govt owned stateoil?And aye,Scotlands oil.



Not seven days ago Davie Cameron was licking arse in Aberdeen, proclaiming the start of a new oil boom, worth Â£2 trillion.Now, off course its diminishing, but there's more left than we're taken out already, and then add on the stuff west of shetland and the stuff in the clyde basin.

So, Norway started an oil fund in the early 90's, which is now worth more than the oil that funded it and will technically, never run out and makes each and every Norwegian citizen a $ millionaire.Recently they had to create anew bank to take on some of the 'burden' of their fund because it was too big for one bank!...so lets be honest, themain reason that westminster has formed the most unholy alliance is because of our oil...it funds loads.
		
Click to expand...

I like many back then when the oil started flowing will be able to remember the exhortations on UK government to do what Norway did and create an oil fund rather than spend it.  And so we just spent it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 7, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			... interesting to see how you cope with a NO vote as you appear so utterly desperate to be away from the English.
		
Click to expand...

...to which I might say it could be very messy - and over the following years the recriminations and complaining about England, Westminster etc will build as Scotland realises things could have been different - so if only for that reason a YES would be a relief.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 7, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Well OPEC for one completely disagrees with your optimistic view of both the North Sea reserves and the viability of developing new fields around Scotland.
		
Click to expand...




Adi2Dassler said:



			So who do you believe?Opec or Cameron?...and as for OPEC, I'm not sure if they're the best source of info...they say oil is running out in an area they have no governance to make them look more attractive?
		
Click to expand...




MetalMickie said:



			I have respect for many of the views you have expressed in this debate but here you appear to have fallen into the same trap as many in the YES camp i.e. selective quotation and reference only to those statements that support your argument.


OPEC are not alone, I believe, in their concerns.
		
Click to expand...

I'm keen to be seen as pragmatic about any aspect of this topic.OPEC is a collective of oil producing nations in the middle east, nothing to do with North Sea production?They have vested interests in playing down the viability of any other oil producing region as it benefits their resource,yes?
David Cameron is PM fighting to save the union and last week brought his entire cabinet to Scotland for the first time ever and chose Aberdeen...he went to an oil rig, announced the value of North Sea oil to be Â£2 trillion with tax receipts of about Â£250 Billion.Now this might be cynical, but what other reason does a really disliked tory PM have for keeping the union intact, except for that Â£250 Billion?

As for the viability of developing other fields, we're not allowed to find out about the clyde basin as test drilling is banned by the MOD to allow trident subs secret passage uninterupted runs into the Atlantic..those same subs universally unwanted by Scottish folk.
And west of shetland...why would Shell/BP etc want licences if it wasn't viable?

And if OPEC aren't alone, give me links if you can please


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 7, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Report in Daily Telegraph Business approx 3-4 weeks ago. Was not particularly positive towards oil production/demand in general and specific in their pessimism for North Sea.
		
Click to expand...




MetalMickie said:



			I have respect for many of the views you have expressed in this debate but here you appear to have fallen into the same trap as many in the YES camp i.e. selective quotation and reference only to those statements that support your argument.


OPEC are not alone, I believe, in their concerns.
		
Click to expand...

So you are happy to believe the DT's (selective) reporting of an Opec Report. Yet you criticise others for their 'selective quotations'!  

As a neutral, I see that as somewhat hypocritical!

But that last comment ('not alone, I believe') is a doozy! 

As for the actual argument. Shouldn't it be about Reserves rather than Production. North Sea is maturing - only having 40 years or so of life. So the thrust of any debate/argument should be 'what happens after that?'. Norway's approach seems to have been reasonably effective!  So if Scotland plans to use it for Scottish people, surely that's a better use of it, for them, than simply having Westminster use it to for general funding! Pretty selfish on both sides - and plenty emotive! Easy to see how the Nationalist cause has become more popular - maybe in line with how aware Scots are that 'their' wealth is being syphoned/pumped off elsewhere!  

And that doesn't consider known/estimated reserves in other areas of Scottish territory.



Adi2Dassler said:



			And west of shetland...why would Shell/BP etc want licences if it wasn't viable?
		
Click to expand...

That's a bit niave though!


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I like many back then when the oil started flowing will be able to remember the exhortations on UK government to do what Norway did and create an oil fund rather than spend it.  And so we just spent it.
		
Click to expand...


I can remember it also being said, to justify the huge sums of UK taxpayers money being spent on North Sea exploration, that in return free gas would be on offer to UK households... Well, I am still waiting...


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			So you are happy to believe the DT's (selective) reporting of an Opec Report. Yet you criticise others for their 'selective quotations'!  

As a neutral, I see that as somewhat hypocritical!

But that last comment ('not alone, I believe') is a doozy! 




			Firstly I did not quote the OPEC report as "gospel", I merely stated that there are concerns about the viability of the remaining North Sea stocks.

Secondly you attempt to validate your position by stating that you are a neutral within this debate but assume I am not. I would contend that all of us living outside Scotland are essentially neutral as we are not being consulted and can only, therefore, be interested bystanders.

Thirdly your quote that reference to OPEC not being alone in their concerns is a "doozy" is, itself, quite baffling.

Finally it is worth noting that the Clyde Basin reserves are both unknown in their quantity and whereabouts. They could, in fact, fall within Northern Ireland's notional territorial waters.

And in reply to adi's question about other links might I suggest a simple Google search :- "declining oil reserves in the North Sea
		
Click to expand...



Click to expand...


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 7, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Were his lips moving?
		
Click to expand...


Same for business leaders... Back when the UK [foolishly] dabbled with the thought of joining the Eurozone many leading business leaders said that if we didn't join they would have to rethink their position in the UK... Guess what... They are all still here operating as before and most probably happy they weren't listened to...


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 7, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Same for business leaders... Back when the UK [foolishly] dabbled with the thought of joining the Eurozone many leading business leaders said that if we didn't join they would have to rethink their position in the UK... Guess what... They are all still here operating as before and most probably happy they weren't listened to...
		
Click to expand...

Of course. CEOs of large companies are effectively just politicians anyway.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 7, 2014)

There is a world of difference between googling 'declining north sea oil reserves' and viability of future North Sea oil reserves.Of course they're declining, they're a finite resource, but its still worth trillions.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 7, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There is a world of difference between googling 'declining north sea oil reserves' and viability of future North Sea oil reserves.Of course they're declining, they're a finite resource, but its still worth trillions.
		
Click to expand...

My point is that neither Holyrood nor Westminster seems to have a solution to the medium term issue whereby reserves are not only diminishing but the financial viability of drawing some of those remaining stocks is also questionable.


I think we are agreed that the resource has, until know, been mismanaged. Where we may differ is over the possibility of the remaining resource generating sufficient long term tax revenues to support Mr Salmond's seemingly ambitious spending plans. 


Free long term care for the elderly etc; is not (or should not be) a short term commitment.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 7, 2014)

MetalMickie said:





Foxholer said:



			So you are happy to believe the DT's (selective) reporting of an Opec Report. Yet you criticise others for their 'selective quotations'!  

As a neutral, I see that as somewhat hypocritical!

But that last comment ('not alone, I believe') is a doozy!
		
Click to expand...

Firstly I did not quote the OPEC report as "gospel", I merely stated that there are concerns about the viability of the remaining North Sea stocks.
.......
And in reply to adi's question about other links might I suggest a simple Google search :- "declining oil reserves in the North Sea
		
Click to expand...

I don't believe there is any doubt that NSOG stock is declining.

And you actually pointed not to the Opec report, but the DT's report on it - which involved selective use of it to make a different story imo.



MetalMickie said:



			Secondly you attempt to validate your position by stating that you are a neutral within this debate but assume I am not.
		
Click to expand...

Codswollap! Where is that assumption - except as one of your own!

It was exactly that 'hypocrisy' (or illogicality?) that I was pointing out.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I don't believe there is any doubt that NSOG stock is declining.

And you actually pointed not to the Opec report, but the DT's report on it - which involved selective use of it to make a different story imo.


Codswollap! Where is that assumption - except as one of your own!

It was exactly that 'hypocrisy' (or illogicality?) that I was pointing out.
		
Click to expand...

I quoted both sources i.e. Daily Telegraph & OPEC.

If you were not making an assumption over my nposition why did you feel it necessary to state your  own.

"doozy" remains outstanding unless you have followed my advice re: Google.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 7, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			I quoted both sources i.e. Daily Telegraph & OPEC.
		
Click to expand...

Only after asked to!



MetalMickie said:



			If you were not making an assumption over my nposition why did you feel it necessary to state your  own.
		
Click to expand...

In an attempt to ensure nobody made an assumption about my preference! Obviously didn't work - for you!



MetalMickie said:



			"doozy" remains outstanding unless you have followed my advice re: Google.
		
Click to expand...

I had already read both those articles - and others! It's the classic throwaway 'everyone knows that ....'!

As for your statement 'I would contend that all of us living outside Scotland are essentially neutral as we are not being consulted and can only, therefore, be interested bystanders.' I think that's simply as wrong as it's possible to be! 

Everybody in the UK has a vested interest because Scotland is part of the UK. Whether they get a say in what happens in this particular referendum is beside the point! There is (was) definitely an argument for everybody in UK having a vote in this referendum, but that isn't what will happen. And the fact that many in the rUK are campaigning against the 'Yes' certainly disproves you point.

Neutral - No; Neutralised - Maybe!

Now. Back to the actual debate. I wouldn't want either of us to be accused of being 'argumentative'!:rofl:


----------



## CMAC (Mar 7, 2014)

I note quite a few other companies and organisations are also 'looking at' the possibility of moving if its a yes vote.

A point to note, rather than argue the semantics, is that any large company with shareholders has a legally binding duty to assess and report on all potential risks and threats it can 'see' in the coming year. So in publishing these comments they are only showing a duty of care and a professional responsible attitude to their shareholders with a possible solution should the 'risk' materialise, in my opinion.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Only after asked to!


In an attempt to ensure nobody made an assumption about my preference! Obviously didn't work - for you!



I had already read both those articles - and others! It's the classic throwaway 'everyone knows that ....'!

As for your statement 'I would contend that all of us living outside Scotland are essentially neutral as we are not being consulted and can only, therefore, be interested bystanders.' I think that's simply as wrong as it's possible to be! 

Everybody in the UK has a vested interest because Scotland is part of the UK. Whether they get a say in what happens in this particular referendum is beside the point! There is (was) definitely an argument for everybody in UK having a vote in this referendum, but that isn't what will happen. And the fact that many in the rUK are campaigning against the 'Yes' certainly disproves you point.

Neutral - No; Neutralised - Maybe!

Now. Back to the actual debate. I wouldn't want either of us to be accused of being 'argumentative'!:rofl:
		
Click to expand...

Question of semantics; neutral or neutralised.

Without a say it is difficult regard an interest as vested as one has no influence over it. 

Whether or not it is right that we lack of a voice in the argument is a whole new debate. (could be another 37 pages & nearly 1100 posts!!)


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 7, 2014)

Out of interest, are there any non Scottish resident posters who have had their opinions widened by the Scottish debate.

On the first couple of pages we had a few, good riddance, close the door type of posts. Most posts now seem to be either asking us to stay or putting strong arguments against a yes vote.


----------



## Val (Mar 7, 2014)

CMAC said:



*I note quite a few other companies and organisations are also 'looking at' the possibility of moving if its a yes vote.*

A point to note, rather than argue the semantics, is that any large company with shareholders has a legally binding duty to assess and report on all potential risks and threats it can 'see' in the coming year. So in publishing these comments they are only showing a duty of care and a professional responsible attitude to their shareholders with a possible solution should the 'risk' materialise, in my opinion.
		
Click to expand...

And plenty are still to show their hand.

The biggest issue is for businesses are far as I see it is the uncertainty over currency, that is a major stumbling block to over come. Danny Alexander has re-iterated that there is no prospect of a currency union and it is not a bluff, that leaves a lot of Scottish companies who cross border trade into other parts of the UK with a major headache.


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Out of interest, are there any non Scottish resident posters who have had their opinions widened by the Scottish debate.

On the first couple of pages we had a few, good riddance, close the door type of posts. Most posts now seem to be either asking us to stay or putting strong arguments against a yes vote.
		
Click to expand...


A concern now is if its a yes vote call me Dave will find a way of wriggling out of his promised referendum on Europe...

Bottom line is [for me] we are better together but if you choose otherwise then I wish you well... Still concerned this is a bit of a gun against head manoeuvre to get devomax rather than independence... Whatever the final outcome its going to be a 'difficult' few years, post vote, benefitting the political classes...


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 7, 2014)

Valentino said:



			And plenty are still to show their hand.

The biggest issue is for businesses are far as I see it is the uncertainty over currency, that is a major stumbling block to over come. Danny Alexander has re-iterated that there is no prospect of a currency union and it is not a bluff, that leaves a lot of Scottish companies who cross border trade into other parts of the UK with a major headache.
		
Click to expand...

Not so much 'show their hand' as 'have their AGM'!

There would be nothing to stop Scotland from using the Pound as its currency though. Just has a different set of risks to Currency Union!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 7, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			A concern now is if its a yes vote call me Dave will find a way of wriggling out of his promised referendum on Europe...

Bottom line is [for me] we are better together but if you choose otherwise then I wish you well... Still concerned this is a bit of a gun against head manoeuvre to get devomax rather than independence... Whatever the final outcome its going to be a 'difficult' few years, post vote, benefitting the political classes...
		
Click to expand...

Many in Scotland, including me, would support Devo Max but we do not have the choice. The no campaign have been totally silent on this matter.
So we are left with whatever Westminster will impose on us. Even though our voting patterns means that we are not represented.

Given the choice many will choose freedom.


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Given the choice many will choose freedom.
		
Click to expand...


If boot was on other foot I'd be very firmly in the yes camp... 
Even if it had a bit of a 'tool' as its flag carrier...


----------



## NWJocko (Mar 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Many in Scotland, including me, would support Devo Max but we do not have the choice. The no campaign have been totally silent on this matter.
So we are left with whatever Westminster will impose on us. Even though our voting patterns means that we are not represented.

Given the choice many will choose freedom.
		
Click to expand...

The No campaign have been silent on Devo Max as it isn't on the table!?! What are you expecting them to comment on?

Salmond wanted Devo Max on the ballot paper but Cameron/Westinster called his bluff so it is Independence or Union.

I tend to agree that Devo Max would romp it were it available as an option.....


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Many in Scotland, including me, would support Devo Max but we do not have the choice.* The no campaign have been totally silent on this matter.*
So we are left with whatever Westminster will impose on us. Even though our voting patterns means that we are not represented.

Given the choice many will choose freedom.
		
Click to expand...

This will be the next big thing at party conferences...esp Labour.They'll come out with we'll consider devo max IF we win the next election, which is nonsense as I seriously doubt they'll win the next GE.


----------



## CMAC (Mar 7, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			The No campaign have been silent on Devo Max as it isn't on the table!?! What are you expecting them to comment on?

Salmond wanted Devo Max on the ballot paper but Cameron/Westinster called his bluff so it is Independence or Union.

*I tend to agree that Devo Max would romp it were it available as an option.*....
		
Click to expand...

I've no evidence but it would appear to be good for Scotland but not the UK. I can see why the Govt said no, seems very one sided.

However its not on the table so not worth discussing............Damn! I just did


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 7, 2014)

It was Cameron who knocked back Devo Max not the SNP.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/02/18/uk-scotland-independence-devolution-idUKBREA1H1JM20140218.

Interesting poll. I forsee quite a lot of spoiled voting papers


----------



## NWJocko (Mar 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			It was Cameron who knocked back Devo Max not the SNP.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/02/18/uk-scotland-independence-devolution-idUKBREA1H1JM20140218.

Interesting poll.
		
Click to expand...

Who said otherwise!?

I don't see why you think that should be a topic for comment by either side as part if this referendum given it is not an option?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Many in Scotland, including me, would support Devo Max but we do not have the choice. The no campaign have been totally silent on this matter.
So we are left with whatever Westminster will impose on us. Even though our voting patterns means that we are not represented.

Given the choice many will choose freedom.
		
Click to expand...

And many, including me, would not support it. I'm glad it's not on the referendum as it just clouded the key issue - independence yes or no - and would have split both the yes and no votes and left the most popular choice without an overall majority. At least whatever wins a majority of people will have voted for it

Not sure what you mean by not represented at Westminster? I voted for a guy called Mark Lazarowicz and he represents my constituency.

Freedom? A tad melodramatic.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 7, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Who said otherwise!?

I don't see why you think that should be a topic for comment by either side as part if this referendum given it is not an option?
		
Click to expand...

 Sorry Jocko [hope that is not offensive!} I miss read your post! blame Manflu.

Not an option, but what the majority of Scots seem to want.


----------



## NWJocko (Mar 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Sorry Jocko [hope that is not offensive!} I miss read your post! blame Manflu.

Not an option, but what the majority of Scots seem to want.
		
Click to expand...

No worries, in the onset of it myself, dreadful affliction!!

Yep, I think its what Salmond wanted ideally aswell.

FD makes a good point on e split of yes/no votes were it on the ballot. At least this is a "clean" vote.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 7, 2014)

I am going for a Manflu citation.
The two prize rams [Â£5k a piece] in the nursery field in front of my house decide to make a break for freedom by jumping a 3' fence. 
Single handed I managed to get them up the road and into a neighbouring field. At times I was ankle deep in mud whilst wearing my [now ruined] slippers. I managed all this whilst in a condition that rendered me barely able to make a cup of tea.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I am going for a Manflu citation.
The two prize rams [Â£5k a piece] in the nursery field in front of my house decide to make a break for freedom by jumping a 3' fence. 
Single handed I managed to get them up the road and into a neighbouring field. At times I was ankle deep in mud whilst wearing my [now ruined] slippers. I managed all this whilst in a condition that rendered me barely able to make a cup of tea.
		
Click to expand...

Isn't that pretty much exactly what any mother of two (especially twins) does every times she goes shopping? 

I carried a 'pet ram', that had become bloated and couldn't stand/walk after eating crab apples, over half a mile down the road to the Vet - twice - many moons ago! Sheep are truly stupid creatures!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Isn't that pretty much exactly what any mother of two (especially twins) does every times she goes shopping? 

I carried a 'pet ram', that had become bloated and couldn't stand/walk after eating crab apples, over half a mile down the road to the Vet - twice - many moons ago! Sheep are truly stupid creatures!
		
Click to expand...

It always amazes me how high they can jump from a standing start.
I saw one clear a 4 foot fence up near Inverewe once.
Tell you what, you would step off the pavement if you saw my two rams coming.

Last year my then three year old grandaughter insisted on knowing their names.
To keep the peace I said one was Billy Big Boy and the other was Gordon Goolie.
We were standing talking to my nice church going neighbour this spring when she announced 'Papa look, Billy Big Boy is back in the field'
Thankfully she did not remember the second ones name.


----------



## Val (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Not so much 'show their hand' as 'have their AGM'!

*There would be nothing to stop Scotland from using the Pound as its currency though. Just has a different set of risks to Currency Union*!
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely, and that is the problem for a number of companies. 

If there was a Scottish pound, surely it can only be used in Scotland then it would also require an exchange rate for crossing the border, very messy.


----------



## Val (Mar 7, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Not sure what you mean by not represented at Westminster? I voted for a guy called Mark Lazarowicz and he represents my constituency.
		
Click to expand...

Always baffles me that no representation or an unelected government nonsense. We all have a voice there, whether you have a good bad or indifferent MP is another matter I suppose. Us, well we have Pamela Nash MP who became the baby of the house when she was voted in.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 7, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I note quite a few other companies and organisations are also 'looking at' the possibility of moving if its a yes vote.

A point to note, rather than argue the semantics, is that any large company with shareholders has a legally binding duty to assess and report on all potential risks and threats it can 'see' in the coming year. So in publishing these comments they are only showing a duty of care and a professional responsible attitude to their shareholders with a possible solution should the 'risk' materialise, in my opinion.
		
Click to expand...

No - I think that you are absolutely right on this (and as I likewise noted in post #1080). Now that some companies have stated their identification of a risk associated with there being a YES vote the shareholders of other Scotland-based companies will want to know that their companies are likewise cognisant of the risks and want to know that their companies are assessing the risks and managing them accordingly.  

And so we will see in the next weeks and months every major company in Scotland making a similar statement as they will have to do for their shareholders.  But a company identifying a risk does not mean that the risk will have a significant negative impact on the business of a company - indeed taking a risk can often result in a positive outcome.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 7, 2014)

Valentino said:



			And plenty are still to show their hand.

The biggest issue is for businesses are far as I see it is the uncertainty over currency, that is a major stumbling block to over come. Danny Alexander has re-iterated that there is no prospect of a currency union and it is not a bluff, that leaves a lot of Scottish companies who cross border trade into other parts of the UK with a major headache.
		
Click to expand...

He will say that in public - but when he has the chairmen of EVERY major company in Scotland coming to him in private and asking him whether there is absolutely 100% no chance of Scotland becoming part of a 'Sterling Zone' in the event of a YES - what will he say.  They will look him in the eye and ask - you do know what this could mean to Scotland and it's people - and you the rUK government are willing to force Scotland to operate outside of the EU and a 'sterling zone' with all that that might entail.  Because if you are saying this as part of your 'Campaign Fear' then please be fully aware of the real meaning of what you say.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 7, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			The No campaign have been silent on Devo Max as it isn't on the table!?! What are you expecting them to comment on?

Salmond wanted Devo Max on the ballot paper but Cameron/Westinster called his bluff so it is Independence or Union.

I tend to agree that Devo Max would romp it were it available as an option.....
		
Click to expand...

They could offer Devo-max as a means to ensure a NO vote.  So why don't they?


----------



## Val (Mar 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No - I think that you are absolutely right on this (and as I likewise noted in post #1080). Now that some companies have stated their identification of a risk associated with there being a YES vote the shareholders of other Scotland-based companies will want to know that their companies are likewise cognisant of the risks and want to know that their companies are assessing the risks and managing them accordingly.  

*And so we will see in the next weeks and months every major company in Scotland making a similar statement as they will have to do for their shareholders.*  But a company identifying a risk does not mean that the risk will have a significant negative impact on the business of a company - indeed taking a risk can often result in a positive outcome.
		
Click to expand...

Too early yet for many especially those opposed to a yes vote, particularly those who are involved in anything to do with government funded works or supply, those who have development programmes that are in planning stages or waiting on planning decisions or basically anyone who might find that not siding with the current Scottish Government could make things fro0m a business point of view difficult.

I'm not for 1 minute suggesting anything corrupt is going on or could go on all im saying is there is still an element of caution from businesses.


----------



## Val (Mar 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			He will say that in public - but when he has the chairmen of EVERY major company in Scotland coming to him in private and asking him whether there is absolutely 100% no chance of Scotland becoming part of a 'Sterling Zone' in the event of a YES - what will he say.  They will look him in the eye and ask - you do know what this could mean to Scotland and it's people - and you the rUK government are willing to force Scotland to operate outside of the EU and a 'sterling zone' with all that that might entail.  Because if you are saying this as part of your 'Campaign Fear' then please be fully aware of the real meaning of what you say.
		
Click to expand...

If the chairmen of these companies is asking him in private then why are many companies still looking at contingency plans in the even of no currency union?

Also consider this, why has no major Scottish based company publicly shown support for the YES campaign? If there has been any I've not seen it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 7, 2014)

Valentino said:



			If the chairmen of these companies is asking him in private then why are many companies still looking at contingency plans in the even of no currency union?

Also consider this, why has no major Scottish based company publicly shown support for the YES campaign? If there has been any I've not seen it.
		
Click to expand...

They will have to put contingency plans in place in case it DOESN'T come about - besides they may not yet have asked.

Maybe because YES contains a risk whereas NO doesn't (other than the UK leaving the EU) - and if they support a YES they will have to explain how they can do that given the uncertainty over currency etc.  I think you are therefore more likely to have companies sit on the fence saying they are OK either way.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 7, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Absolutely, and that is the problem for a number of companies. 

If there was a Scottish pound, surely it can only be used in Scotland then it would also require an exchange rate for crossing the border, very messy.
		
Click to expand...

I wasn't meaning a Scottish Pound - surely Poond anyway - but simply use the UK Pound - with all the risks (cannot influence policy etc) that entails. The 'Bank of Last Resort' would already have to be something other then Bank of England anyway. And, of course, the Euro could be used in the same way - though more hassle!


----------



## Val (Mar 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			They will have to put contingency plans in place in case it DOESN'T come about - besides they may not yet have asked.

Maybe because YES contains a risk whereas NO doesn't (other than the UK leaving the EU) - and if they support a YES they will have to explain how they can do that given the uncertainty over currency etc.  I think you are therefore more likely to have companies sit on the fence saying they are OK either way.
		
Click to expand...

No large business will support a yes where there is uncertainty over currency especially if they cross border trade with the UK. 

People can dress all the ands, if's and but's they like, if you are a multi million pound organisation why would back a proposal that could potentially cost your company lots of money when there is an alternative that costs nothing?


----------



## Val (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I wasn't meaning a Scottish Pound - surely Poond anyway - but simply use the UK Pound - with all the risks (cannot influence policy etc) that entails. The 'Bank of Last Resort' would already have to be something other then Bank of England anyway. And, of course, the Euro could be used in the same way - though more hassle!
		
Click to expand...

Surely you need a currency union to allow that?


----------



## NWJocko (Mar 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			They could offer Devo-max as a means to ensure a NO vote.  So why don't they?
		
Click to expand...

Do keep up. That was knocked on the head at the outset when Salmond was after his safety net on get ballot paper but the only way Westminster would allow a referendum was a straight Yes/No to Independence.

Amazed you don't know that with all the pontificating you do on the subject!!!!


----------



## NWJocko (Mar 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			He will say that in public - but when he has the chairmen of EVERY major company in Scotland coming to him in private and asking him whether there is absolutely 100% no chance of Scotland becoming part of a 'Sterling Zone' in the event of a YES - what will he say.  They will look him in the eye and ask - you do know what this could mean to Scotland and it's people - and you the rUK government are willing to force Scotland to operate outside of the EU and a 'sterling zone' with all that that might entail.  Because if you are saying this as part of your 'Campaign Fear' then please be fully aware of the real meaning of what you say.
		
Click to expand...

We do go round in circles.

It is up to Salmond to negotiate and agree he picture post Yes.  I still don't know why you see the onus on Westminster but then you never answer that question!!!


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 7, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Surely you need a currency union to allow that?
		
Click to expand...

No. Why? Plenty of countries use the US Dollar without having Currency Union.

In fact, there are plenty that say Europe would be better to have it that way (but with the Euro). That way the 'one size fits all' ECB wouldn't need to juggle Germany's efficiency with Greece's corruption! But that wouldn't suit the 'Federal States of Europe' goals that seem to be dominant.


----------



## Val (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			No. Why? Plenty of countries use the US Dollar without having Currency Union.

In fact, there are plenty that say Europe would be better to have it that way (but with the Euro). That way the 'one size fits all' ECB wouldn't need to juggle Germany's efficiency with Greece's corruption! But that wouldn't suit the 'Federal States of Europe' goals that seem to be dominant.
		
Click to expand...

Hmm, fair point. Surely there had to be permission or agreement of sorts somewhere though, it can't be as easy as just picking a currency and saying that'll do.

If that's the case we should adopt the dong, it would be nice to listen to the wife say she has a good handful of dong


----------



## williamalex1 (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			No. Why? Plenty of countries use the US Dollar without having Currency Union.

In fact, there are plenty that say Europe would be better to have it that way (but with the Euro). That way the 'one size fits all' ECB wouldn't need to juggle Germany's efficiency with Greece's corruption! But that wouldn't suit the 'Federal States of Europe' goals that seem to be dominant.
		
Click to expand...


View attachment 9437
will this do


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 7, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



View attachment 9437
will this do
		
Click to expand...


Note the 'Sterling', that is not on the Bank of UK [England] notes.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Note the 'Sterling', that is not on the Bank of UK [England] notes.
		
Click to expand...

And where it can be cashed in.

As the Scottish banks are authorised to print those notes (with some provisos) by the UK Government, that authorisation, the  printing and what is printed on them would be another thing that would need to be reviewed and very likely have to change.

Btw. It is a criminal offence to reproduce banknotes in any way without consent!!


----------



## DCB (Mar 7, 2014)

That has been doing the rounds for a while. Don't really think it can be classed as a bona fide banknote   by.any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 7, 2014)

DCB said:



			That has been doing the rounds for a while. Don't really think it can be classed as a bona fide banknote   by.any stretch of the imagination. 

Click to expand...

Doesn't matter whether it's bona fide or not!

Here's a rather relevant bit from Bank of England. There'll be an equivalent for Scottish Notes.
[Extract]
Introduction
Under section 18(1) of the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981 it is a criminal offence for any person, without the prior consent in writing of the Bank of England, to reproduce on any substance whatsoever, and whether or not on the correct scale, any Bank of England banknote or any part of a Bank of England banknote. The Bank of England also owns the copyright in its banknotes.

Novelty Banknotes
The Bank of England does not give authority for any reproductions in the form of a novelty banknote (e.g. one where a celebrity or other images are shown on a banknote or other such changes).  This is because there have been instances of notes altered in this way, being accepted as genuine banknotes by unsuspecting members of the public.

[/Extract]

'Harmless' as they are, their mere presence means that the Forum is breaking the law!


----------



## ger147 (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Doesn't matter whether it's bona fide or not!

Here's a rather relevant bit from Bank of England. There'll be an equivalent for Scottish Notes.
[Extract]
Introduction
Under section 18(1) of the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981 it is a criminal offence for any person, without the prior consent in writing of the Bank of England, to reproduce on any substance whatsoever, and whether or not on the correct scale, any Bank of England banknote or any part of a Bank of England banknote. The Bank of England also owns the copyright in its banknotes.

Novelty Banknotes
The Bank of England does not give authority for any reproductions in the form of a novelty banknote (e.g. one where a celebrity or other images are shown on a banknote or other such changes).  This is because there have been instances of notes altered in this way, being accepted as genuine banknotes by unsuspecting members of the public.

[/Extract]

'Harmless' as they are, their mere presence means that the Forum is breaking the law!
		
Click to expand...

They are not Bank of England notes.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 7, 2014)

ger147 said:



			They are not Bank of England notes.
		
Click to expand...

Read the line above [Extract]!

Only quoted the BofE because it specifically mentioned Novelty ones. Here's a bit more that includes Scottish.



The reproduction of banknotes is an offence. The law states that:
(1) It is an offence for any person, unless the relevant authority has previously consented in writing, to reproduce on any substance whatsoever, and whether or not on the correct scale, any British currency note or any part of a British currency note.
(2) In this sectionâ€”
â€œBritish currency noteâ€ means any note whichâ€”
(a) has been lawfully issued in England and Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland; and
(b) is or has been customarily used as money in the country where it was issued; and
(c) is payable on demand; and
â€œthe relevant authorityâ€, in relation to a British currency note of any particular description, means the authority empowered by law to issue notes of that description. (Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981, s.18).

If you want to reproduce parts of a banknote, consent of the bank is required in advance. This applies to the reproduction of the front or the back of a banknote, for reproductions of all banknotes issued in the UK whether current legal tender or not; and for all possible reproductions, including modified or distorted reproductions. Until you receive written consent, you are not entitled to reproduce any banknote or any part of a banknote. Permission to reproduce banknotes or parts of it needs to be sought from the issuing bank.


----------



## ger147 (Mar 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Read the line above [Extract]!

Only quoted the BofE because it specifically mentioned Novelty ones. Here's a bit more that includes Scottish.



The reproduction of banknotes is an offence. The law states that:
(1) It is an offence for any person, unless the relevant authority has previously consented in writing, to reproduce on any substance whatsoever, and whether or not on the correct scale, any British currency note or any part of a British currency note.
(2) In this sectionâ€”
â€œBritish currency noteâ€ means any note whichâ€”
(a) has been lawfully issued in England and Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland; and
(b) is or has been customarily used as money in the country where it was issued; and
(c) is payable on demand; and
â€œthe relevant authorityâ€, in relation to a British currency note of any particular description, means the authority empowered by law to issue notes of that description. (Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981, s.18).

If you want to reproduce parts of a banknote, consent of the bank is required in advance. This applies to the reproduction of the front or the back of a banknote, for reproductions of all banknotes issued in the UK whether current legal tender or not; and for all possible reproductions, including modified or distorted reproductions. Until you receive written consent, you are not entitled to reproduce any banknote or any part of a banknote. Permission to reproduce banknotes or parts of it needs to be sought from the issuing bank.
		
Click to expand...

Not arguing with the law about bank notes, just your quoting of the BoE about Scottish bank notes.

I notice that the novelty notes rule is not part of the act.


----------



## williamalex1 (Mar 7, 2014)

Oops were going to have to take the makers of the  Monopoly money  to court , their notes are better than Salmonds twinties.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 7, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Oops were going to have to take the makers of the  Monopoly money  to court , their notes are better than Salmonds twinties.
		
Click to expand...

Only if Monopoly money reproduced/copied 'British Currency Notes'. As that's not the case, no problem.

I believe it's also fine to create your own e.g. Bank of Mum and Dad notes, provided they are not 'based' on British Currency ones. And the guy that I heard this from was one I was 'minded to believe' - an employee of one of those Scottish Banks with a law degree - and I think working in something like the 'Corporate Legal' area! He had a bit of a panic when someone was photocopying/amending one of their notes in a similar jokey way for a social evening!

Still! Back fully On Topic! Currency does seem to be one of the 'sticking points'!:lol:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 13, 2014)

Went along to my village yes debate tonight.
Some interesting speakers including a Scottish Socialist and one anti-English idiot.
My SNP voting English wife soon put the idiot right though.

The Yes folk seem to be quite confident that the voters will buy into a Scottish currency. A fiscal studies expert [from the floor] said that it is just one great big bluff and that there is no way a rUK will not accommodate a Scottish pound. A Standard Life insider also said Scotland will keep the pound and that they [SL] are going nowhere.

Mainly greyskulls in the audience, disappointing that there were no young folk.
The yes folk think the momentum is with them and they will just about carry the day.
As a fence sitter, I think I will remain there. No vote debate coming soon. Their new slogan 'Be positive Vote NO'.


----------



## CMAC (Mar 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Went along to my village yes debate tonight.
Some interesting speakers including a Scottish Socialist and one anti-English idiot.
My SNP voting English wife soon put the idiot right though.

The Yes folk seem to be quite confident that the voters will buy into a Scottish currency. A fiscal studies expert [from the floor] said that it is just one great big bluff and that there is no way a rUK will not accommodate a Scottish pound. A Standard Life insider also said Scotland will keep the pound and that they [SL] are going nowhere.

Mainly greyskulls in the audience, disappointing that there were no young folk.
The yes folk think the momentum is with them and they will just about carry the day.
As a fence sitter, I think I will remain there. No vote debate coming soon. *Their new slogan 'Be positive Vote NO'*.
		
Click to expand...

I prefer 'You have to be dence to vote for indepen_dence_' :mmm:


You have to admire their unwavering resilience in ignoring facts, Mr Salmond has taught them well:blah:


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Went along to my village yes debate tonight.
Some interesting speakers including a Scottish Socialist and one anti-English idiot.
My SNP voting English wife soon put the idiot right though.

The Yes folk seem to be quite confident that the voters will buy into a Scottish currency. A fiscal studies expert [from the floor] said that it is just one great big bluff and that there is no way a rUK will not accommodate a Scottish pound. A Standard Life insider also said Scotland will keep the pound and that they [SL] are going nowhere.

Mainly greyskulls in the audience, disappointing that there were no young folk.
The yes folk think the momentum is with them and they will just about carry the day.
As a fence sitter, I think I will remain there. No vote debate coming soon. Their new slogan 'Be positive Vote NO'.
		
Click to expand...

According to George Soros it would seem that the euro would be the most likely currency for Scotland in the event of a Yes vote.

If so I wish all you Scots the best of luck.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 13, 2014)

Ye poowers that mak mankind their care
an dish them oot their bill O fare
Ald Scotland wants na skinking ware
that joups in luggies.

So if ya want her grateful prayer
Gi her a Ruble!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 14, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			According to George Soros it would seem that the euro would be the most likely currency for Scotland in the event of a Yes vote.
		
Click to expand...

You take advice from a man who caused Black Thursday?

That is nearly as bad as asking Alisdair Darling and George Brown advice on the UK economy.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You take advice from a man who caused Black Thursday?

That is nearly as bad as asking Alisdair Darling and George Brown advice on the UK economy.
		
Click to expand...

George Soros didn't cause Black Thursday! For a couple of reasons!

Firstly, the Interest Rate disaster in 1992 he was involved in was Black Wednesday!  

Secondly, the cause was the idiot committee that set/agreed the Rules of the ERM - and didn't foresee the potential for disaster they had created - and the idiots that didn't realise how powerful markets could be.

Soros was simply the biggest winner of those that took advantage of the situation when it inevitably arrived!


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You take advice from a man who caused Black Thursday?

That is nearly as bad as asking Alisdair Darling and George Brown advice on the UK economy.
		
Click to expand...

 If I were able to obtain advice from Mr Soros I would certainly take it as it would likely have more credibility than that offered by a " fiscal studies expert ".


----------



## Val (Mar 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You take advice from a man who caused Black Thursday?

That is nearly as bad as asking Alisdair Darling and George Brown advice on the UK economy.
		
Click to expand...

George Brown?

I'll assume you mean Gordon Brown, who was the man that drove the economy to the beaks in the early to mid 2000's as chancellor, and managed to keep us away from the Euro. Gordon Brown wasn't to blame for the national economic meltdown, he just happened to be PM when it happened.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 14, 2014)

Valentino said:



			George Brown?

I'll assume you mean Gordon Brown, who was the man that drove the economy to the beaks in the early to mid 2000's as chancellor, and managed to keep us away from the Euro. Gordon Brown wasn't to blame for the national economic meltdown, he just happened to be PM when it happened.
		
Click to expand...

Oops sorry I must have been on Tony Benn mode thinking.......George Brown indeed, what a fool he was.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 14, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			According to George Soros it would seem that the euro would be the most likely currency for Scotland in the event of a Yes vote.
		
Click to expand...

Well George Soros is talking guff, but trot on and take his word for it.


----------



## One Planer (Mar 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Well George Soros is talking guff, but trot on and take his word for it.
		
Click to expand...


Is there any firm evidence to the contrary?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 14, 2014)

I find it quite amazing that a guy who did huge damage to the UK economy, made many folk bankrupt, and caused widespread poverty is suddenly a 'person to be listened to'.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I find it quite amazing that a guy who did huge damage to the UK economy, made many folk bankrupt, and caused widespread poverty is suddenly a 'person to be listened to'.
		
Click to expand...

As MP for Kirkaldy, Gordon has probably earned that right! :whoo:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 14, 2014)

That did make me chuckle!!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 14, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Is there any firm evidence to the contrary?
		
Click to expand...

there is no evidence to support either opinion, except you can be an EU nation and NOT use the euro.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 14, 2014)

We had quite an interesting discussion last night on why the City/Westminster did not rescue Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley.


----------



## Val (Mar 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			We had quite an interesting discussion last night on why the City/Westminster did not rescue Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley.
		
Click to expand...

So who rescued Northern Rock?


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			We had quite an interesting discussion last night on why the City/Westminster did not rescue Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley.
		
Click to expand...

Did anyone point out that, by Nationalising them, they *were* rescued?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Well George Soros is talking guff, but trot on and take his word for it.
		
Click to expand...

We now appear to have reached the point where anyone offering an opinion not deemed acceptable to the Yes side's argument is dismissed, regardless of their standing, as talking guff.

Sad!


----------



## G1BB0 (Mar 14, 2014)

What do the Scots bring to the table....

Cant get on a ride on Blackpool pleasure beach beacause of them
Have to wait ages for the lower league footy results cos some random league is 1st
The odd delivery driver who one has to then phone up the company and have a translator or hopes they have a babelfish implant
Dougie Donnelly


I will let them off with the TV and the telephone


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			except you can be an EU nation and NOT use the euro.
		
Click to expand...

Not if your a new boy


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 14, 2014)

Valentino said:



			George Brown?

I'll assume you mean Gordon Brown, who was the man that drove the economy to the beaks in the early to mid 2000's as chancellor, and managed to keep us away from the Euro. *Gordon Brown wasn't to blame for the national economic meltdown, he just happened to be PM when it happened.*

Click to expand...

I would question that.   He increased public spending by 60% on his watch, opened the floodgates to immigration to the extent our public services are in meltdown due to the increased demand and birthrate.   Increased borrowing by unprecedented levels to prop up his vast increases in benefits (Tax credits etc).   The financial meltdown was not the major cause for the massive deficit  in the Nations finances.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 14, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			I would question that.   He increased public spending by 60% on his watch, opened the floodgates to immigration to the extent our public services are in meltdown due to the increased demand and birthrate.   Increased borrowing by unprecedented levels to prop up his vast increases in benefits (Tax credits etc).   The financial meltdown was not the major cause for the massive deficit  in the Nations finances.
		
Click to expand...

I think you are wearing your (our) blue tinted specs Socket. It wasn't him that opened the floodgates of immigration! That was the result of another (Blue) Government's action. Tax Credits were/are 'Fiscally Neutral' simply being a different - to him, 'fairer' - way to provide the same service. No different, really, than the Universal Credit' the the Coalition has introduced. 

And far from reducing the deficit, the Coalition is continuing to run way ahead of its own deficit predictions and the deficit is increasing! All just a propoganda war - that the Coalition (actually the Tories) happens to be in the best position to take advantage of - imo!

Btw.
The Financial meltdown may have been the wind that blew the house of cards down, but it was also the balloon of hot air that the cards were sitting on in the first place. and that reliance on Financial Services, as opposed to 'real' products goes back to Thatcher and beyond - imo!

Here's an article you should browse! http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article37845.html

So in that regard, I agree with Val!

While I believe the referendum result will be a reasonably solid 'No', I think Cameron will get more and more desperate as time goes by as I'm certain he doesn't want to be seen as the guy in charge when Scotland was 'lost' from the United Kingdom! It was always going to be a very negative 'campaign', but I believe it will bet more-so by June /July!


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 14, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I think you are wearing your (our) blue tinted specs Socket. It wasn't him that opened the floodgates of immigration! That was the result of another (Blue) Government's action. Tax Credits were/are 'Fiscally Neutral' simply being a different - to him, 'fairer' - way to provide the same service. No different, really, than the Universal Credit' the the Coalition has introduced. 

And far from reducing the deficit, the Coalition is continuing to run way ahead of its own deficit predictions and the deficit is increasing! All just a propoganda war - that the Coalition (actually the Tories) happens to be in the best position to take advantage of - imo!

Btw.
The Financial meltdown may have been the wind that blew the house of cards down, but it was also the balloon of hot air that the cards were sitting on in the first place. and that reliance on Financial Services, as opposed to 'real' products goes back to Thatcher and beyond - imo!

Here's an article you should browse! http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article37845.html

So in that regard, I agree with Val!

While I believe the referendum result will be a reasonably solid 'No', I think Cameron will get more and more desperate as time goes by as I'm certain he doesn't want to be seen as the guy in charge when Scotland was 'lost' from the United Kingdom! It was always going to be a very negative 'campaign', but I believe it will bet more-so by June /July!
		
Click to expand...


View attachment 9533


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 14, 2014)

Looks like all the UK parties are now getting their devomax ducks lined up.

They just might get a fright.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 14, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



View attachment 9533

Click to expand...


http://www.economicshelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/public-sector-debt-ons.png

Snap!

Shows how ridiculous statistics are! There looks to be a distinct bias in those figures - why pick 2005 as the 'base'? I'm sure the rise between 2008-2010 had a pretty direct relationship to the 'Banking Crash' too. And the most significant of your graph (2013-2015) is an estimate!

Anyway, this thread is about Scotland, not Labour/Conservatives


----------



## chrisd (Mar 15, 2014)

G1BB0 said:



			What do the Scots bring to the table....

Cant get on a ride on Blackpool pleasure beach beacause of them
Have to wait ages for the lower league footy results cos some random league is 1st
The odd delivery driver who one has to then phone up the company and have a translator or hopes they have a babelfish implant
Dougie Donnelly


I will let them off with the TV and the telephone
		
Click to expand...

This is probably the most pertinent summing up of the whole debate, fact like this can't be ignored in the trivia of politics that this discussion has debated!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 15, 2014)

G1BB0 said:



			What do the Scots bring to the table....
		
Click to expand...

Golf
Whisky
Irn Bru

An ability to make work related decisions.


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Golf
Whisky
Irn Bru

An ability to make work related decisions.
		
Click to expand...

You forgot lorne sausage, stays in a roll a treat without falling out


----------



## CMAC (Mar 15, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			You forgot lorne sausage, stays in a roll a treat without falling out
		
Click to expand...

lol, just bought 4 this morning as you cant pieces and sausage (tomato sauce) with tea for the 6 nations today:whoo:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 15, 2014)

Lorne sausage with an eye of black pudding, now your talking.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Lorne sausage with an eye of black pudding, now your talking.
		
Click to expand...

A good by-product of the Lorne sausage is that, after cooking, there is sufficient fat left in the frying pan to make three or four wild bird fat balls.


----------



## CMAC (Mar 15, 2014)

Doon, you realise your talking to yourself


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 15, 2014)

Just a wee add on.

Shouting at the telly......... with Hogg's sending off.
Just Ireland to cheer on now.
Hope the best team win!


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Just a wee add on.

Shouting at the telly......... with Hogg's sending off.
Just Ireland to cheer on now.
Hope the best team win!
		
Click to expand...

Hogg needs shouting at, not the telly


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 16, 2014)

One important but seldom raised point is that an iScotland would have an elected second chamber.

Getting rid of Trident and The House of Lords in one fell swoop.......wow.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			One important but seldom raised point is that *an iScotland would have an elected second chamber*.

Getting rid of Trident and The House of Lords in one fell swoop.......wow.
		
Click to expand...

Doon. What makes you think that? Specifically stated in White Paper that there will be No 2nd Chamber!

More codswallop?!

Btw. Coming from a country with no 2nd chamber, I can see significant advantages in having a 2nd chamber!


----------



## CMAC (Mar 16, 2014)

and now a westminster committee has said independence will damage higher education and research in Scotland if the dence win.

They state a huge financial shortfall the pro party havent made clear how they would deal with this lack of education and reseacrh funding they currently recieve as part of the union.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26596530


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 16, 2014)

CMAC said:



			and now a westminster committee has said independence will damage higher education and research in Scotland if the dence win.

They state a huge financial shortfall the pro party havent made clear how they would deal with this lack of education and reseacrh funding they currently recieve as part of the union.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26596530

Click to expand...

Much as I would normally - and do - think the 'Westminster Committee' is somewhat biased, it would seem these guys may have a point.

The question could well be asked about why Scotland is getting 'more than its fair share' currently!

I don't believe it really is, though there may be a slight discrepancy here and there. These are just UK wide budgets that are outside the Barnet formula.

After Independence, it's really just a case of Scottish getting 100% of Tax raised in Scotland and then allocating it as they see fit - as opposed to the Tax going to UK Government and either being allocated to Scotland via the Barnet formula or being dished out from Westminster via the various grants etc. It would merely involve the (enormous) task of identifying and changing the way all such allocation works when the countries separate!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Not if your a new boy
		
Click to expand...

Incorrect, as I've already shown on this very thread.There is information available, be in possession of the facts before making any spurious claims.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 17, 2014)

I quite like the Scottish education system.
My missus signed up for an 8 week advanced digital camera course run by Ayr College.
She went along to pay this week thinking it would be Â£100+ to be told it was free.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			be in possession of the facts before making any spurious claims.
		
Click to expand...

Your making me sound like a YES voter.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Your making me sound like a YES voter.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl::clap:


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Incorrect, as I've already shown on this very thread.There is information available, be in possession of the facts before making any spurious claims.
		
Click to expand...

Thats a novel concept!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 18, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Your making me sound like a YES voter.
		
Click to expand...




Foxholer said:



			:rofl::clap:
		
Click to expand...

Easily pleased then?

I've never made any claims I can't back up, the same can't be said for the unionists on this thread, which I've picked up on and have been met with silence in return.I'm prepared to debate this, but only if you come armed with facts and not nonsense, or you can continue to make sleekit sarcastic replies, they'll only benefit the yes vote with undecideds


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 18, 2014)

G1BB0 said:



			What do the Scots bring to the table....
The odd delivery driver who one has to then phone up the company and have a translator
		
Click to expand...

Great response to the 'can you speak a little slower' comment to the broad Weegie accent on the radio this morning.

'No pal, you need to think a bit faster'


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Great response to the 'can you speak a little slower' comment to the broad Weegie accent on the radio this morning.

'No pal, you need to think a bit faster'
		
Click to expand...

:rofl: :clap:



Adi2Dassler said:



			Easily pleased then?
		
Click to expand...

Easily amused - as above! Significant difference.



Adi2Dassler said:



			I've never made any claims I can't back up, the same can't be said for the unionists on this thread, which I've picked up on and have been met with silence in return.I'm prepared to debate this, but only if you come armed with facts and not nonsense, or you can continue to make sleekit sarcastic replies, they'll only benefit the yes vote with undecideds
		
Click to expand...

That comment is so self contradictory it doesn't warrant more than a 'Pah!' reply. There's nonsense being uttered by both sides - on this very page (to my 40 post/page view).


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Easily pleased then?

I've never made any claims I can't back up, the same can't be said for the unionists on this thread, which I've picked up on and have been met with silence in return.I'm prepared to debate this, but only if you come armed with facts and not nonsense, or you can continue to make sleekit sarcastic replies, they'll only benefit the yes vote with undecideds
		
Click to expand...

How do you square the above comment with your dismissal, last week, of George Soros as "talking a lot of guff"?


----------



## Val (Mar 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Easily pleased then?

I've never made any claims I can't back up, the same can't be said for the unionists on this thread, which I've picked up on and have been met with silence in return.I'm prepared to debate this, but only if you come armed with facts and not nonsense, or you can continue to make sleekit sarcastic replies, they'll only benefit the yes vote with undecideds
		
Click to expand...

I'm interested in your side of the debate but you do come across as someone who doesn't see any merits in the NO campaign, you also answer comments on currency and Europe in the same mould as Salmond ie, they cant do that and they wont do that (currency union, eu membership), you are very one sided. 



MetalMickie said:



			How do you square the above comment with your dismissal, last week, of George Soros as "talking a lot of guff"?
		
Click to expand...

Good point.

As you will gather, I'm currently a NO voter as if im honest I probably fear the change and nothing in the YES campaign is making me excited about the change.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 18, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			According to George Soros it would seem that the euro would be the most likely currency for Scotland in the event of a Yes vote.

If so I wish all you Scots the best of luck.
		
Click to expand...




Adi2Dassler said:



			Well George Soros is talking guff, but trot on and take his word for it.
		
Click to expand...




MetalMickie said:



			How do you square the above comment with your dismissal, last week, of George Soros as "talking a lot of guff"?
		
Click to expand...

Because he was.The most likely currency for any indy Scotland would be the Â£.Now whether that's in some sort of structured currency union with England or not is another thing entirely, but the suggestion from Soros we'll be using the Euro is guff.I stand by that assertion.



Valentino said:



			I'm interested in your side of the debate but you do come across as someone who doesn't see any merits in the NO campaign, you also answer comments on currency and Europe in the same mould as Salmond ie, they cant do that and they wont do that (currency union, eu membership), you are very one sided. 



Good point.

As you will gather, I'm currently a NO voter as if im honest I probably fear the change and nothing in the YES campaign is making me excited about the change.
		
Click to expand...

I cannot see one glimmer of merit in any argument put forward by the No campaign, whether asking Barroso to claim we'd be refused entry into the EU on the back of endorsing his NATO nomination, or refusal to even discuss a formal currency union, I see nothing +.I see Darling and Brown pontificating about financial matters when these two men are the reason we are where we are.I see Osbourne coming to Edinburgh and refusing to answer any questions after he's told us how things are.

Legally we can us the Â£ whether anyone wants us to or not, Legally I'm a European citizen and I'd be fascinated how Brussels would go about removing those rights, and removing those EU citizens living and working in Scotland.Legally we can join the EU and not use the currency.

I see nothing but fear and loathing from the No campaign, I see diverse range of views from those keen independence.

Have a look here>http://allofusfirst.org/ or here > http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/ or here > http://nationalcollective.com/


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 18, 2014)

Over the last few weeks I've read experts and Westminster tell us that an iScotland won't be in a 'sterling zone' with rUK; it won't be in the EU (at least for some time) so no Euro; and it wouldn't be able to operate it's own currency.  Now if I believe all of that then an iScotland wouldn't have a currency - really?  No currency?  So which of the aforementioned do I disbelieve as they can't all be true.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			As you will gather, I'm currently a NO voter as if im honest I probably fear the change and nothing in the YES campaign is making me excited about the change.
		
Click to expand...

Val,

Not an unreasonable attitude. That's the greatest hurdle the Yes campaign has to overcome imo.

But I don't believe it shouldn't be the change (transition) itself that you should make your mind on, but the 'vision' of where you see Scotland  - and UK - 20+ years from now. 

If the Yes campaign has not inspired you to believe in their vision, then they have failed, in your case. If the No campaign has bogged them down explaining details of the transition, rules for which haven't even been established, then they have done a good, if negative, job too. 

If the Yes wish to go the 'negative campaign' route, they should start hammering the London-centric approach of Westminster - Â£50bn for HS2 for no benefit to Scotland. 15k new homes in a new Garden City - no benefit to Scotland. 

But I believe your main 'fear' is the loss to Scotland of 'Scottish' business. If the Yes campaign can convince you, and many others of course, that either that won't happen or that it will actually benefit Scotland - by making a more balanced economy - they will convert a lot of those that would vote No out of fear imo.



Adi2Dassler said:



			Legally we can us the Â£ whether anyone wants us to or not
		
Click to expand...

This I agree with.



Adi2Dassler said:



			Legally I'm a European citizen and I'd be fascinated how Brussels would go about removing those rights, and removing those EU citizens living and working in Scotland.Legally we can join the EU and not use the currency.
		
Click to expand...

The fact that you are saying 'we can join the EU', by whatever means rather indicates that (initially) you expect to not be part of the EU. Is it relevant that you describe yourself as a European citizen rather than an EU one? EU membership having been lost, it only takes 1 vote to prevent you from rejoining. 
The issue of EU (or UK) citizens living/working in Scotland is something for EU (or UK) and Scotland to negotiate/decide. I can't see it working any other way than now, even if not part of EU unless the Scotland UK border was policed! 





Adi2Dassler said:



			I see nothing but fear and loathing from the No campaign, I see diverse range of views from those keen independence.
		
Click to expand...

Open the other eye then? 

Always was destined to be a 'negative' campaign.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:






			Because he was.The most likely currency for any indy Scotland would be the Â£.Now whether that's in some sort of structured currency union with England or not is another thing entirely, but the suggestion from Soros we'll be using the Euro is guff.I stand by that assertion.
		
Click to expand...

Just because that is what you want to happen does not mean that it is the most likely outcome. Yes there is the possibility of Scotland continuing to use sterling but without any controls or influence over exchange or interest rates.

Surely, therefore, assuming Scotland was allowed to join the EU it would be better to join the euro and at least have some control, however limited.

Or, deep down are you not completely confident that EU membership is a given.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 18, 2014)

MetalMickie said:





Adi2Dassler said:



			Just because that is what you want to happen does not mean that it is the most likely outcome. Yes there is the possibility of Scotland continuing to use sterling but without any controls or influence over exchange or interest rates.

Surely, therefore, assuming Scotland was allowed to join the EU it would be better to join the euro and at least have some control, however limited.

Or, deep down are you not completely confident that EU membership is a given.
		
Click to expand...

Not entirely sure you're being serious or just fishing.I've stated my beliefs, all based on verifiable laws.If you think Scotland wouldn't have the Â£ or EU membership I'm OK with that.I try to answer as honestly as I'm able (I answer what I believe will happen, not what I WANT to happen) so in the spirit of fairness, could you answer the following please?

1) Scotland and Scottish citizens are paid up members of The European Union, we've paid our dues and we're good citizens.In the event of a Yes vote, can you forsee any reason for that not to continue?And if your answer is no, what do you think would happen to the rights I've had and the French/Polish/German/Spanish nationals living and working in Scotland?Would they be told they have no longer the right to live here?

2)The Â£ is a fully tradeable currency, if Ukraine decides tomorrow to use the Â£ there is nothing anyone can do to stop them, same applies to Scotland.Would it make sense for rUK to enter into dialogue with iScotland to arrange some formal guidelines making both economies run parallel to each other, or should rUK refuse to entertain such proposals, similar proposals they currently have with IoM?

3)Why do you think that never seen before in peace time cross party agreement and solidarity at Westminster against Scottish independence is so vocal?What possible reason does the Conservative party have for keeping a left leaning electorate in play?

4)As the Â£ is obviously the main bargaining tool of rUK in all of this, do you think that coulport and faslane are as weighty a barginaing tool for the yes campaign?
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 18, 2014)

1) The whole point of a YES vote is surely a new beginning. This equally applies to EU membership. Scottish citizens are members of the EU whilst they remain within the UK. You can't retain just parts of the status quo.

2) It is not disputed that Scotland could retain sterling. The question is why would they if they had no control or influence. Would it make sense  for the UK to enter into a concorde with Scotland post a YES vote? No not really as it would appear that the two countries and their economies would have distinctly different objectives.

3) The full title of the Tory party remains, I believe, the Conservative & Unionist Party. I agree that many grass root Tory supporters south of the border would, however, be "glad to see the back of the Scots".

4) The naval bases are, I agree, an issue but there are bases in England that could be used and due to current employment issues the locals would welcome this.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			.....
1) Scotland and Scottish citizens are paid up members of The European Union, we've paid our dues and we're good citizens.In the event of a Yes vote, can you forsee any reason for that not to continue?And if your answer is no, what do you think would happen to the rights I've had and the French/Polish/German/Spanish nationals living and working in Scotland?Would they be told they have no longer the right to live here?
		
Click to expand...

The first statement of that question is invalid.

Point to any agreement between EU and Scotland - that isn't through the UK. Show me an official, current, document that indicates anyone is a Scottish citizen - as opposed to a UK one.

How iScotland and EU deal with the EU workers etc, should iScotland not be admitted, is up to negotiation. There are already examples. Being a member of the EEA provides all the benefits without the hassle! I expect that's a much more likely route than direct into EU.


----------



## Val (Mar 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Val,

Not an unreasonable attitude. That's the greatest hurdle the Yes campaign has to overcome imo.

But I don't believe it shouldn't be the change (transition) itself that you should make your mind on, but the 'vision' of where you see Scotland  - and UK - 20+ years from now.
		
Click to expand...

You see thats where the fear part comes in, 20 years + is when I'm looking at retiring so from a purely selfish point of view (is their any other in this debate) the fear is what has to drive my thinking. 

Should I be more optimistic post YES? Probably but lets be honest, the recent massive global economic meltdown has lots of folk my age thinking further ahead in terms of what is lying waiting (or not waiting for that matter) for us.



Foxholer said:



			If the Yes campaign has not inspired you to believe in their vision, then they have failed, in your case. If the No campaign has bogged them down explaining details of the transition, rules for which haven't even been established, then they have done a good, if negative, job too.
		
Click to expand...

I think that is the case currently, I think the NO campaign still have to up the ante, what I mean is actually campaign for a NO rather than throw curve balls in about Economy/Currency/EU etc etc and really get those with a bit of fear more scared of change.



Foxholer said:



			But I believe your main 'fear' is the loss to Scotland of 'Scottish' business. If the Yes campaign can convince you, and many others of course, that either that won't happen or that it will actually benefit Scotland - by making a more balanced economy - they will convert a lot of those that would vote No out of fear imo.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely spot on but the major hurdle I see is currency and cross border trading and until they get a definitive on that then lots of large Scottish businesses won't break cover in support and more will remain in the NO camp privately (believe me it's happening now).

Very good post Foxholer :thup:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 18, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			1) The whole point of a YES vote is surely a new beginning. This equally applies to EU membership. Scottish citizens are members of the EU whilst they remain within the UK. You can't retain just parts of the status quo.

2) It is not disputed that Scotland could retain sterling. The question is why would they if they had no control or influence. Would it make sense  for the UK to enter into a concorde with Scotland post a YES vote? No not really as it would appear that the two countries and their economies would have distinctly different objectives.

3) The full title of the Tory party remains, I believe, the Conservative & Unionist Party. I agree that many grass root Tory supporters south of the border would, however, be "glad to see the back of the Scots".

4) The naval bases are, I agree, an issue but there are bases in England that could be used and due to current employment issues the locals would welcome this.
		
Click to expand...

4) I wasn't talking about jobs, I was talking about coulport, which for some reason, neither side are making much noise about.There is no where in The UK like coulport and suggestions are it would take 10+ years to recreate, thats once you've found somewhere you're actually allowed to put it.Between oil receipts and coulport...the only two reasons westminster want the union to continue...no coulport=no nukes=no security council=etc

3) I didn't mean 'glad to see the back' merchants, I meant they need Scotland for oil and nukes.

2)which means after negotiations we'll get our currency union and rUK will get a stay of execution on coulport



Foxholer said:



			The first statement of that question is invalid.

Point to any agreement between EU and Scotland - that isn't through the UK. Show me an official, current, document that indicates anyone is a Scottish citizen - as opposed to a UK one.

How iScotland and EU deal with the EU workers etc, should iScotland not be admitted, is up to negotiation. There are already examples. Being a member of the EEA provides all the benefits without the hassle! I expect that's a much more likely route than direct into EU.
		
Click to expand...

There is no document between Scotland and any international body, except maybe, the commonwealth.We'll be welcomed in to the sound of the skirl into The UN,EU and any other body we decide we'd like to join.

The ukraine is an interesting current reference.There is suggestions that NATO wanted to site missiles there and it effectively kicked off the crimea nonsense.I seriously doubt NATO would want a big gap in their defences in the north atlantic either, so NATO/FIFA/EU and Nandos will all give us a big cuddle and pour the brandies.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 18, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			4) The naval bases are, I agree, an issue but there are bases in England that could be used ...
		
Click to expand...

Not if you believe Vice-Adml John McAnally

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...force-Britain-to-abandon-nuclear-weapons.html


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 18, 2014)

There is an old saying that if you kid yourself on long enough you will end up believing it!

Apparently the whole world is just waiting to welcome Scotland into whatever they like and on Scotland's terms.

Aye right!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 18, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			There is an old saying that if you kid yourself on long enough you will end up believing it!

Apparently the whole world is just waiting to welcome Scotland into whatever they like and on Scotland's terms.

Aye right!
		
Click to expand...

Well they're certainly not lining up to refuse us entry into the international fold as a responsible nation, contrary to the spin coming from BT


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not if you believe Vice-Adml John McAnally

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...force-Britain-to-abandon-nuclear-weapons.html

Click to expand...

Er. Correction. 'Not if you believe the headline of an article quoting him!'

 '"every possibility" ... could ' magically becomes 'Will' in the headline!


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Well they're certainly not lining up to refuse us entry into the international fold as a responsible nation, contrary to the spin coming from BT
		
Click to expand...

Sorry what did Barroso say about EU membership for an independent Scotland?

Oh yes he was talking guff wasn't he!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 18, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Sorry what did Barroso say about EU membership for an independent Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

Barroso said 'it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for an independent Scotland to join the European Union'.

Now, if you don't think that is 100% guff I'm not going to debate this with you anymore.Read it again, because that's what he said, word for word, to Andrew Marr.So not only would we have to apply, it would be *'extremely difficult, if not impossible'* for Scotland to join.

And what happened the day or so after this interview?Cameron endorses Barosso to be secretary general of NATO.A co-incidence, I'd expect.Nothing more.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 18, 2014)

The whole issue as to whether we remain EU citizens or not is similar to a query I have about British citizenship.

Socially, culturally etc, I'm British. I'm also Scottish but I strongly identify as British and I can't see my feelings on that changing.

So if Scotland does vote for independence do I lose my British citizenship or do I have the option to retain it? What about English, Welsh, N Irish who reside in Scotland? Should those groups be treated in the same way?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Barroso said 'it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for an independent Scotland to join the European Union'.

Now, if you don't think that is 100% guff I'm not going to debate this with you anymore.Read it again, because that's what he said, word for word, to Andrew Marr.So not only would we have to apply, it would be *'extremely difficult, if not impossible'* for Scotland to join.

And what happened the day or so after this interview?Cameron endorses Barosso to be secretary general of NATO.A co-incidence, I'd expect.Nothing more.
		
Click to expand...

What is there to discuss?

It is pointless as anything or anyone you disagree with is dismissed as guff or talking guff.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

So have people said it will be no problem for an Independent Scotland to join their organisation ? 

NATO ? UN? The EU ? 

I'm guessing that there must be for people to suggest it's a matter of fact that Scotland will join the relevant organisations ? 

Not sure how anyone can say what "will" happen - surely it's just what they "want" to happen


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Barroso said 'it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for an independent Scotland to join the European Union'.

Now, if you don't think that is 100% guff I'm not going to debate this with you anymore.Read it again, because that's what he said, word for word, to Andrew Marr.So not only would we have to apply, it would be *'extremely difficult, if not impossible'* for Scotland to join.

And what happened the day or so after this interview?Cameron endorses Barosso to be secretary general of NATO.A co-incidence, I'd expect.Nothing more.
		
Click to expand...

Of course an independent Scotland would be able to join - if not at first then in the not too distant future.   For BT or Barroso to suggest otherwise is just seriously disingenuous.


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 18, 2014)

I remain puzzled... The Scots wish away from a 'remote dictatorship' yet wish to remain signed up to a 'remote dictatorship'...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 18, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			I remain puzzled... The Scots wish away from a 'remote dictatorship' yet wish to remain signed up to a 'remote dictatorship'...
		
Click to expand...

We don't need to question what they want - if they decide that the sub-optimal form of independence on offer is good enough - then that is up to them.  If they get it they will seek to develop it from sub-optimal form towards optimal form.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 18, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			What is there to discuss?

It is pointless as anything or anyone you disagree with is dismissed as guff or talking guff.
		
Click to expand...

So when presented with what was actually said you refuse to concede guff was talked.Well done you.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So when presented with what was actually said you refuse to concede guff was talked.Well done you.
		
Click to expand...


Surely it's just opinion if what he said was "guff" or not - MM doesn't have to concede anything.

You have just dismissed what was said as guff so what's the point in MM discussing anything with you when you have closed your opinion. Anytime anything that is said that appears negatively towards a yes vote it is immediately dismissed as "guff" - you have made your mind up - is the yes vote and nothing will change that.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There is no document between Scotland and any international body, except maybe, the commonwealth.We'll be welcomed in to the sound of the skirl into The UN,EU and any other body we decide we'd like to join.
		
Click to expand...

So you were guff-ing then! And, more than likely guff-ing again!



Adi2Dassler said:



			So when presented with what was actually said you refuse to concede guff was talked.Well done you.
		
Click to expand...

Well, unless you can *prove* what Barrossa was guff, his opinion is just as valid as yours - and has a bit more authority! Whether he's believable is up to the individual. Remember the Preparation for Nuclear Attack drills!


----------



## Val (Mar 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			The whole issue as to whether we remain EU citizens or not is similar to a query I have about British citizenship.

Socially, culturally etc, I'm British. I'm also Scottish but I strongly identify as British and I can't see my feelings on that changing.

So if Scotland does vote for independence do I lose my British citizenship or do I have the option to retain it? What about English, Welsh, N Irish who reside in Scotland? Should those groups be treated in the same way?
		
Click to expand...

This is a big big thing and appears to have either been missed or no one else thinks it a big thing. I know someone who is Scottish living in Europe (all be it temporarily) working for the British Government, if she loses her British Citizenship to become Scottish she may lose her job.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			This is a big big thing and appears to have either been missed or no one else thinks it a big thing. I know someone who is Scottish living in Europe (all be it temporarily) working for the British Government, if she loses her British Citizenship to become Scottish she may lose her job.
		
Click to expand...


There a thousands of Scots working for the British Government in many areas - Military , Police , MoD , etc - what happens with them ?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			There a thousands of Scots working for the British Government in many areas - Military , Police , MoD , etc - what happens with them ?
		
Click to expand...

Exactly, and many more living outside Scotland. Will SILH require a visa to remain in England?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Exactly, and many more living outside Scotland. Will SILH require a visa to remain in England?
		
Click to expand...

The question is do they want Scotland to be Independant ? Because they don't get a chance to vote I believe.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			There a thousands of Scots working for the British Government in many areas - Military , Police , MoD , etc - what happens with them ?
		
Click to expand...

I am not aware of any requirement for someone to be a British citizen if they are to be employed by the UK Government. Nepalese Gurkhas serve in the British Army and both in this country and overseas foreign nationals are directly or indirectly employed by our Government.


----------



## Val (Mar 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			There a thousands of Scots working for the British Government in many areas - Military , Police , MoD , etc - what happens with them ?
		
Click to expand...

Along with who starts the Scottish Army, would a 20+ years RSM want to leave the British Army and join the Scottish Army?

I know I wouldn't.


----------



## Val (Mar 18, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			I am not aware of any requirement for someone to be a British citizen if they are to be employed by the UK Government. Nepalese Gurkhas serve in the British Army and both in this country and overseas foreign nationals are directly or indirectly employed by our Government.
		
Click to expand...

It's a fair point but I can only post the concerns of someone in that position.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			I am not aware of any requirement for someone to be a British citizen if they are to be employed by the UK Government. Nepalese Gurkhas serve in the British Army and both in this country and overseas foreign nationals are directly or indirectly employed by our Government.
		
Click to expand...

Certain Commonwealth countries have alliances ( if that's the right word ) that allow them to join the military dating back centuries I believe. But I'm not sure if they need a British Passport or not


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Along with who starts the Scottish Army, would a 20+ years RSM want to leave the British Army and join the Scottish Army?

I know I wouldn't.
		
Click to expand...

Can't see many wanting to leave tbh


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 18, 2014)

Valentino said:



			This is a big big thing and appears to have either been missed or no one else thinks it a big thing. I know someone who is Scottish living in Europe (all be it temporarily) working for the British Government, if she loses her British Citizenship to become Scottish she may lose her job.
		
Click to expand...

Not if in the handover from Westminster to Scotland Westminster agrees that all employees can as it were be TUPE'd - so as employees they move from working for the UK to working for Scotland - but still delivering the same 'service' to the UK as they were doing. Besides - am I a citizen under the Crown or Westminster?  If the former then nothing changes - perhaps.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Exactly, and many more living outside Scotland. Will SILH require a visa to remain in England?
		
Click to expand...

I will have joint citizenship


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not if in the handover from Westminster to Scotland Westminster agrees that all employees can as it were be TUPE'd - so as employees they move from working for the UK to working for Scotland - but still delivering the same 'service' to the UK as they were doing. Besides - am I a citizen under the Crown or Westminster?  If the former then nothing changes - perhaps.
		
Click to expand...

What if the job they are doing has nothing to do with Scotland ? And the job is still needed to be done for the UK.

Will the Scottish government start to do jobs previously done by British Government ? I wouldn't expect so and would expect the British Government to carry on doin the same job.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I will have joint citizenship
		
Click to expand...

Will you ? 

Nothing is certain or set stone surely ? 

Will the English people living and working in Scotland be offered joint citizenship ?


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I will have joint citizenship
		
Click to expand...

You've decided that have you?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The question is do they want Scotland to be Independant ? Because they don't get a chance to vote I believe.
		
Click to expand...

I believe that you are correct in that 

Do I want Scotland to be independant?  In some ways yes - in some ways no.  But I can't say how I'd vote because I do not live in Scotland.  Living outside of Scotland I have a perspective on Scotland that is 'once removed', and as things would look and feel different were I 'inside the box' I therefore honestly cannot say what I would vote.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 18, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			You've decided that have you? 

Click to expand...

Well I live in England so I would have rUK citizenship (because they can't take that away from me) and the Scottish government would grant me Scottish citizenship as I was born in Scotland.  So no I haven't decided that - as that is what would happen.

Unless you think I would have my rUK citizenship withdrawn?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well I live in England so I would have rUK citizenship (because they can't take that away from me) and the Scottish government would grant me Scottish citizenship as I was born in Scotland.  So no I haven't decided that - as that is what would happen.
		
Click to expand...

Why can't they take away British citizenship ?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why can't they take away British citizenship ?
		
Click to expand...

Who is going to take it away and why?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Who is going to take it away and why?
		
Click to expand...


Well the British Government could take it away if you decide to take up Scottish Citzenship 

Again you or I or anyone can't say for certain what will or won't happen - hence why you don't know if you will have dual Citzenship offered


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Well the British Government could take it away if you decide to take up Scottish Citzenship 

Again you or I or anyone can't say for certain what will or won't happen - hence why you don't know if you will have dual Citzenship offered
		
Click to expand...

Bingo


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Well the British Government could take it away if you decide to take up Scottish Citzenship 

Again you or I or anyone can't say for certain what will or won't happen - hence why you don't know if you will have dual Citzenship offered
		
Click to expand...

In which case I would like BT to let the Scottish electorate know the citizenship status of their relatives living in England following a YES.  Because although I don;t get a vote this would affect the likes of me and what affects me might sway the vote of say my mother.  Besides - does the UK withdraw citizenship from someone who gets US or Australian citizenship?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			In which case I would like BT to let the Scottish electorate know the citizenship status of their relatives living in England following a YES.  Because although I don;t get a vote this would affect the likes of me and what affects me might sway the vote of say my mother.  Besides - does the UK withdraw citizenship from someone who gets US or Australian citizenship?
		
Click to expand...

I don't know - and BT ( whoever they are ) I'm sure don't need to say anything about Citzenship - it's not them that wants the change.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Certain Commonwealth countries have alliances ( if that's the right word ) that allow them to join the military dating back centuries I believe. But I'm not sure if they need a British Passport or not
		
Click to expand...

They do not and apart from the Gurkhas who in some instances have been made a special case they are not guaranteed permission to settle in the UK after completion of service.

I know what with baited breath for the Yes people to tell me I'm wrong as this reply may not suit them.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 18, 2014)

Well my English wife and two English daughters living in Scotland are more than happy to give up there UK citizenship to become Scottish.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well my English wife and two English daughters living in Scotland are more than happy to give up there UK citizenship to become Scottish.
		
Click to expand...

Two more candidates off the pensions payroll in the future.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 18, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Two more candidates off the pensions payroll in the future.
		
Click to expand...

Please explain.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Please explain.
		
Click to expand...


I'm guessing by giving up their UK citizenship that would be mean they would give up their state pension and then look to get one from Scottish State Pensions.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 18, 2014)

And.......


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			And.......
		
Click to expand...

That would mean they would no longer be on the UK pension payroll. Thought it was quite self explanatory.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Please explain.
		
Click to expand...

I would have thought that RUK will only be liable for OAP credits up to the time that independence is achieved. Now if an iscotland is still going to run a OAP pensions scheme (not seen any mention so maybe they arnt)' I presume that contributions up till then will go into that scheme. If there isn't going to be an OAP pension provision maybe we just keep those contributions but as the Yes party hav'nt come up with any detail on how anything will work, I, nor you can answer that one.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			That would mean they would no longer be on the UK pension payroll. Thought it was quite self explanatory.
		
Click to expand...

The Yes campaign don't do detail.


----------



## chrisd (Mar 18, 2014)

If the vote is Yes, does that mean the BBC news won't put Celtic's score out first on the Sunday 6 o clock news?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 18, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I would have thought that RUK will only be liable for OAP credits up to the time that independence is achieved. Now if an iscotland is still going to run a OAP pensions scheme (not seen any mention so maybe they arnt)' I presume that contributions up till then will go into that scheme. If there isn't going to be an OAP pension provision maybe we just keep those contributions but as the Yes party hav'nt come up with any detail on how anything will work, I, nor you can answer that one.
		
Click to expand...

Oh dear.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Oh dear.
		
Click to expand...

Don't worry, it won't happen


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 18, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well I live in England so I would have rUK citizenship (because they can't take that away from me) and the Scottish government would grant me Scottish citizenship as I was born in Scotland.  So no I haven't decided that - as that is what would happen.

Unless you think I would have my rUK citizenship withdrawn?
		
Click to expand...

Seems as good a guess as any and likewise I'd expect for ruk folks living in Scotland.

Back to my question though.... As a Brit born in Scotland and living here do I lose my British citizenship?


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Seems as good a guess as any and likewise I'd expect for ruk folks living in Scotland.

Back to my question though.... As a Brit born in Scotland and living here do I lose my British citizenship?
		
Click to expand...

Not sure it works like that, I have always called myself British but I think for census and documentation it comes down to country where birth was registered.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Seems as good a guess as any and likewise I'd expect for ruk folks living in Scotland.

Back to my question though.... As a Brit born in Scotland and living here do I lose my British citizenship?
		
Click to expand...

Probably.


----------



## scottbrown (Mar 19, 2014)

This maybe a silly question, but having just read all 125 pages there doesn't seem to be an answer. 

I am not Scotish and have no Scotish links and so some may say it doesn't concern me and tbf as it stands I have no view on whether it should be a yes or no vote. 
However what I am interested in is will it affect me one way or the other? 
Just be nosey really


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I don't know - and BT ( whoever they are ) I'm sure don't need to say anything about Citzenship - it's not them that wants the change.
		
Click to expand...

But removing my UK citizenship in not something that a Scottish government would do - it is something an rUK government would do - so that is most definitely something that is in the BT camp to advise voters on.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I'm guessing by giving up their UK citizenship that would be mean they would give up their state pension and then look to get one from Scottish State Pensions.
		
Click to expand...

Who mentioned I'd have to give up my UK citizenship if I was granted Scottish citizenship?  Not something a Scottish government have said would be a requirement of Scottish citizenship as far as I am aware.  

Any removal of UK citizenship is only something Westminster could decide policy upon and implement.  So would they do it?  The rUK government seem able to tell us about other things that Westminster would grant (such as entry into a 'sterling zone' - or not)


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 19, 2014)

Trident and a non nuclear Scotland is the most obvious thing to affect rUK in the short term.
The economy will also affect you if rUK continue with their sterling strategy.
Displacement of EU workers in Scotland to rUK if we are refused EU membership.
Short term you will have problems with power until the nuclear power stations are built.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Trident and a non nuclear Scotland is the most obvious thing to affect rUK in the short term.
The economy will also affect you if rUK continue with their sterling strategy.
Displacement of EU workers in Scotland to rUK if we are refused EU membership.
Short term you will have problems with power until the nuclear power stations are built.
		
Click to expand...

Why do you think displaced EU workers would be moved to rUK?   They could move anywhere in the EU.  Also why would Scotland want to remove them?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Short term you will have problems with power until the nuclear power stations are built.
		
Click to expand...

Interested in the thinking behind this one.... Yes, the UK does have upcoming problems with energy supply but how would Scottish independence affect rUK in the short term?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 19, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Interested in the thinking behind this one.... Yes, the UK does have upcoming problems with energy supply but how would Scottish independence affect rUK in the short term?
		
Click to expand...

Scotland will be using all of it's renewable capacity to look after itself.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 19, 2014)

Last night BBC Scotland debate came from Kirkcaldy.
Interesting discussion on BBC bias, they were all trying to get Swinney to agree on bias but he managed to stay neutral.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Last night BBC Scotland debate came from Kirkcaldy.
Interesting discussion on BBC bias, they were all trying to get Swinney to agree on bias but he managed to stay neutral.
		
Click to expand...

Thought that was OK last night, a reasonable panel as The BBC insist on not just having politicians.

On the question of BBC bias, it was the only route available to Swinney.Obviously the No folk were going to say The BBC were doing a good job, leaving Swinney sitting there imagining the headlines if he had stuck the boot in.Very restrained.

The laddie who chaired it was also good.


----------



## williamalex1 (Mar 19, 2014)

Anyone know how the vehicle licensing [road tax] will work if it's a yes vote. There's far too many questions not been thought out, it's a NO from me.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Scotland will be using all of it's renewable capacity to look after itself.
		
Click to expand...



Aye right.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 19, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Anyone know how the vehicle licensing [road tax] will work if it's a yes vote. There's far too many questions not been thought out, it's a NO from me.
		
Click to expand...

But is that kind of question really that important?You'll still pay it (emission tax) but if you're basing your decision on that kind of detail you were never considering voting yes anyway.


----------



## Val (Mar 19, 2014)

scottbrown said:



			This maybe a silly question, but having just read all 125 pages there doesn't seem to be an answer. 

I am not Scotish and have no Scotish links and so some may say it doesn't concern me and tbf as it stands I have no view on whether it should be a yes or no vote. 
*However what I am interested in is will it affect me one way or the other*? 
Just be nosey really 

Click to expand...

In short, yes it will.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			But is that kind of question really that important?You'll still pay it (emission tax) but if you're basing your decision on that kind of detail you were never considering voting yes anyway.
		
Click to expand...

I sort of see your point but, for me, it highlights a big flaw in the process.

There are those who see the "big picture" of an independent Scotland and the possibilities it opens up and like that and embrace it and will vote "yes" regardless. (You, I guess)

There are others who are philosophically opposed to independence, who think people should be coming together rather than pushing apart and will vote "no" regardless. (Me)

And there are others (probably the majority) who maybe lean one way or the other but not enough to vote on the principle. These people are crying out to be informed about what the realities, the specifics of an independent Scotland would be and they are being badly let down. By both sides. 

It doesn't help if when people raise legitimate concerns or queries they are dismissed out of hand.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 19, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Anyone know how the vehicle licensing [road tax] will work if it's a yes vote. There's far too many questions not been thought out, it's a NO from me.
		
Click to expand...

That really is a detail way down the list of priorities I would expect to be considered for a Yes/No decision. There's not even an outline plan for when becoming a separate country would happen - and neither should there be, except to prove the viability of doing so and answering the 'major' questions.

While ability of an iScotland infrastructure to manage those sort of details might be a consideration - an inevitable increase in Scottish Civil Service being the result - the transfer of this sort of function from UK to iScotland shouldn't need to be considered for the question the referendum is asking!

I suspect you are really a "don't trust/like/want change" type. If so, you are actually one of the huge group the Yes campaign has to target and convince! The dedicate Yes or No voters aren't in the majority, yet, so (at least the Yes crew) depend on convincing you to have faith in their vision.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 19, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It doesn't help if when people raise legitimate concerns or queries they are dismissed out of hand.
		
Click to expand...

Is it a legitimate concern?What if Swinney had used last night to announce the's abolished emission tax in iScotland?Folk would craw on about the unaffordability of such a move.Or if he had announced that he's raising it by 10%?Petrol heads would go mental.No, the sensible and obvious answer is it'll stay the same, much like most things of such insignificance.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Is it a legitimate concern?What if Swinney had used last night to announce the's abolished emission tax in iScotland?Folk would craw on about the unaffordability of such a move.Or if he had announced that he's raising it by 10%?Petrol heads would go mental.No, the sensible and obvious answer is it'll stay the same, much like most things of such insignificance.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, I agree this is a minor detail, the wider point is the total lack of clarity about anything. In this one campaign I would like to see politicians breaking with tradition and giving straight, definitive answers.

Doesn't really affect my vote though. If all Scottish golfers named "Karen" were going to be given an annual grant to cover their golf club fees I'd still be voting no.... (Although I don't see why westminster couldn't roll out that policy uk-wide)


----------



## williamalex1 (Mar 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			But is that kind of question really that important?You'll still pay it (emission tax) but if you're basing your decision on that kind of detail you were never considering voting yes anyway.
		
Click to expand...

That would require a new system to be set up for issuing/ collecting the road tax, because at the moment it's dealt with by the DVLA in Swansea.
 There's also the defence set up , are we going to form our own army/ navy /air force. Are we going to recall the Scots from the UK forces .Which would leave a shortage in the UK forces
 I don't imagine there's enough able bodied trained personnel staying in Scotland to take up all the required positions, or we could wait to be annexed by Vladimir, just like Crimea.

A new national pension set up will also be needed, these are just a few unimportant !! matters that have not been made clear.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 19, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I sort of see your point but, for me, it highlights a big flaw in the process.

There are those who see the "big picture" of an independent Scotland and the possibilities it opens up and like that and embrace it and will vote "yes" regardless. (You, I guess)

There are others who are philosophically opposed to independence, who think people should be coming together rather than pushing apart and will vote "no" regardless. (Me)

And there are others (probably the majority) who maybe lean one way or the other but not enough to vote on the principle. These people are crying out to be informed about what the realities, the specifics of an independent Scotland would be and they are being badly let down. By both sides. 

It doesn't help if when people raise legitimate concerns or queries they are dismissed out of hand.
		
Click to expand...

You (and the BT campaign) seem to be seeking precision and certainly from the YES campaign about the future when none of us know for certain what the future is going to be like if nothing changes.  It is absolutely right to seek clarification but it is simply a a fact that very little in life is 100% certain to happen.  

Ask a Tory politician today about what will be in their first budget if returned to government at the next West'er elections.  They will be vague - some of it because they don't know or don't want to tell - but some of it quite correctly on the grounds they do not have any firm idea of what the lie of the land will be and the environment in which the UK economy will be functioning at that time.  But you can set out the principles and when in power negotiate and work towards these principles.  

If you require 100% certainty to vote YES then you will definitely be voting NO.  How many of us do things that might well result in advantage to us even though only 90% sure of the positive outcome.  We all do from time to time.  And we do this for very significant life events - not just the lottery.  We accept new jobs we are not 100% of; we might ask the girl to marry us though we might not be 100% certain it's the correct thing; we move home; we have children when our future finances might not be able stand the strain.  But we do these things because we believe them to be the right thing - the best thing for us.  Life is risk/reward - there is very little certainty.  If you believe in an independent Scotland being what is right for Scotland then you will vote for it.  If you are really worried that your car tax might go up or how Scotland and rUK would sort it out then you probably won't.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 19, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			That would require a new system to be set up for issuing/ collecting the road tax, because at the moment it's dealt with by the DVLA in Swansea.
 There's also the defence set up , are we going to form our own army/ navy /air force. Are we going to recall the Scots from the UK forces .Which would leave a shortage in the UK forces
 I don't imagine there's enough able bodied trained personnel staying in Scotland to take up all the required positions, or we could wait to be annexed by Vladimir, just like Crimea.

A new national pension set up will also be needed, these are just a few unimportant !! matters that have not been made clear.
		
Click to expand...

I assume you've not taken the time to have a wee scan thru the white paper the SNP delivered last year?And for clarity, I've never and will never vote SNP, I'll never endorse them or their motives, excluding independence.But I can argue their point of view, much like,if asked,I can argue my own.


----------



## williamalex1 (Mar 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			That really is a detail way down the list of priorities I would expect to be considered for a Yes/No decision. There's not even an outline plan for when becoming a separate country would happen - and neither should there be, except to prove the viability of doing so and answering the 'major' questions.

While ability of an iScotland infrastructure to manage those sort of details might be a consideration - an inevitable increase in Scottish Civil Service being the result - the transfer of this sort of function from UK to iScotland shouldn't need to be considered for the question the referendum is asking!

I suspect you are really a "don't trust/like/want change" type. If so, you are actually one of the huge group the Yes campaign has to target and convince! The dedicate Yes or No voters aren't in the majority, yet, so (at least the Yes crew) depend on convincing you to have faith in their vision.
		
Click to expand...

I believe united we stand , suspect all you like but I have always been and will stay a no vote.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 19, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			I believe united we stand
		
Click to expand...

aye, because the westminster elite with tax breaks and endorsing tax avoidance of billions really are united we stand with the food bank users of easterhouse and pilton,eh?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You (and the BT campaign) seem to be seeking precision and certainly from the YES campaign about the future when none of us know for certain what the future is going to be like if nothing changes.  It is absolutely right to seek clarification but it is simply a a fact that very little in life is 100% certain to happen.  

Ask a Tory politician today about what will be in their first budget if returned to government at the next West'er elections.  They will be vague - some of it because they don't know or don't want to tell - but some of it quite correctly on the grounds they do not have any firm idea of what the lie of the land will be and the environment in which the UK economy will be functioning at that time.  But you can set out the principles and when in power negotiate and work towards these principles.  

If you require 100% certainty to vote YES then you will definitely be voting NO.  How many of us do things that might well result in advantage to us even though only 90% sure of the positive outcome.  We all do from time to time.  And we do this for very significant life events - not just the lottery.  We accept new jobs we are not 100% of; we might ask the girl to marry us though we might not be 100% certain it's the correct thing; we move home; we have children when our future finances might not be able stand the strain.  But we do these things because we believe them to be the right thing - the best thing for us.  Life is risk/reward - there is very little certainty.  If you believe in an independent Scotland being what is right for Scotland then you will vote for it.  If you are really worried that your car tax might go up or how Scotland and rUK would sort it out then you probably won't.
		
Click to expand...

I absolutely get that. But we are currently exposed to day after day, night after night of our countries second-rate politicians bickering over minutia while providing absolutely no concrete details. It's pointless and it's boring.

Personally, I think all the economic arguments are irrelevant. Scotland will survive and life will go on quite happily one way or the other. It's a purely philosophical decision for me and I'd rather have seen the referendum a year ago. However, these matters are being "debated" but no information is coming out - so the whole process is tedious. 

I think either of two alternative methods would have been preferable:

* a quick referendum based purely on the principle of independence, held last year or maybe the year before!
* proper negotiation between scottish and uk parliaments to agree a blueprint for independence that establishes a "baseline" for iScotland year 1. Voters then vote for or against that. 

Instead what we have is a quite unedifying and, at times, embarrassing spectacle. I, for one, am sick of it already and can only see it getting worse over the next 6 months.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 19, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			I believe united we stand , suspect all you like but I have always been and will stay a no vote.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed, I meant to add the 'died in the wool' No voter just raising another trivial 'what-if' as an alternative.



FairwayDodger said:



			I absolutely get that. But we are currently exposed to day after day, night after night of our countries second-rate politicians bickering over minutia while providing absolutely no concrete details. It's pointless and it's boring.

Personally, I think all the economic arguments are irrelevant. Scotland will survive and life will go on quite happily one way or the other. It's a purely philosophical decision for me and I'd rather have seen the referendum a year ago. However, these matters are being "debated" but no information is coming out - so the whole process is tedious. 

I think either of two alternative methods would have been preferable:

* a quick referendum based purely on the principle of independence, held last year or maybe the year before!
* proper negotiation between scottish and uk parliaments to agree a blueprint for independence that establishes a "baseline" for iScotland year 1. Voters then vote for or against that. 

Instead what we have is a quite unedifying and, at times, embarrassing spectacle. I, for one, am sick of it already and can only see it getting worse over the next 6 months.
		
Click to expand...

You haven't followed, or been forced to follow, a General Election (anywhere, I hasten to add) closely then?

From my experience in 3 different countries, you are correct - it will get worse!

Still that's Western Democracy for you! If you want it done quicker, go the Crimea/Eastern Democracy method!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 19, 2014)

United we stand eh!

The welfare changes which introduced the bedroom tax was supported by 11 Westminster MP's in Scotland [Con/Dems]
At present Scotland would be one of the richest countries in the world.
At present Scotland also has the 4th largest split between rich and poor in the world.

Not united to me.....I am uncomfortable living in that kind of country and would seek to change it.


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			United we stand eh!

The welfare changes which introduced the bedroom tax was supported by 11 Westminster MP's in Scotland [Con/Dems]
At present Scotland would be one of the richest countries in the world.
At present Scotland also has the 4th largest split between rich and poor in the world.

Not united to me.....I am uncomfortable living in that kind of country and would seek to change it.
		
Click to expand...

But do you actually want independence or the real 'prize' devomax?

Fairly certain Salmond wants the latter...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 19, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			But do you actually want independence or the real 'prize' devomax?

Fairly certain Salmond wants the latter...
		
Click to expand...

I would prefer devo max but I don't trust the Eton Mess to make a fair choice when it comes to Scotland.
They are now running scared as they did not anticipate a close vote.


----------



## Val (Mar 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You (and the BT campaign) seem to be seeking precision and certainly from the YES campaign about the future when none of us know for certain what the future is going to be like if nothing changes.
		
Click to expand...

I've heard this a lot but what puzzles me is who said anything would change if we vote NO in Scotland?


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I would prefer devo max but I don't trust the Eton Mess to make a fair choice when it comes to Scotland.
They are now running scared as they did not anticipate a close vote.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately for yourself and Salmond devo max is not an option for this vote...

Believe he [Salmond] is hoping for a yes vote which he can then use as leverage to negotiate for his desired devo max...

Hopefully the "Eton mess" give him short shrift should that be the case...

My concern is, in the event of a yes vote, my chance of voting to get out of Europe will vanish....


----------



## Val (Mar 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I would prefer devo max but I don't trust the Eton Mess to make a fair choice when it comes to Scotland.
They are now running scared as they did not anticipate a close vote.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think it will be close, Im pretty sure we'll see a resounding NO


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I assume you've not taken the time to have a wee scan thru the white paper the SNP delivered last year?And for clarity, I've never and will never vote SNP, I'll never endorse them or their motives, excluding independence.But I can argue their point of view, much like,if asked,I can argue my own.
		
Click to expand...

Are you referring solely to Defence here?  The white paper gives a proposed force structure which looks a bit unbalanced.  It doesn't give any indication on how a Brigade plus (talking only about land forces here) would be recruited, that might be tricky given that Scottish Infantry Battalions within the British Army have had recruitment problems for years,                 and years.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I don't think it will be close, Im pretty sure we'll see a resounding NO
		
Click to expand...

What would the figures be  to make it resounding for you?For me, I'd think 65/35 would be resounding.Which means you think,using recent polling data (something I don't like) that every undecided PLUS some current yes voters are all going to vote No.That's just not going to happen.

This vote will be close, 52/48 is my guess, maybe 51/49.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 19, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Are you referring solely to Defence here?  The white paper gives a proposed force structure which looks a bit unbalanced.  It doesn't give any indication on how a Brigade plus (talking only about land forces here) would be recruited, that might be tricky given that Scottish Infantry Battalions within the British Army have had recruitment problems for years,                 and years.
		
Click to expand...

It may be unbalanced, I dunno.If I had my way we'd have a seriously minimal defence force and be a neutral country.I'd spend money on ships and helicopters as part of search and rescue/fishing protection force/homeland security thing.the idea of having battalions of men with guns and bombs turns me off completely, but I also appreciate my views might not be shared on this forum.


----------



## fundy (Mar 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			What would the figures be  to make it resounding for you?For me, I'd think 65/35 would be resounding.Which means you think,using recent polling data (something I don't like) that every undecided PLUS some current yes voters are all going to vote No.That's just not going to happen.

This vote will be close, 52/48 is my guess, maybe 51/49.
		
Click to expand...

If you genuinely believe that then you should be filling your boots on backing yes at the 4/1 thats available, betting markets dont have it anywhere near as close as you believe


----------



## USER1999 (Mar 19, 2014)

I am still surprised that something as irreversible as independence can be decide on a 51 percent majority. 

You can't even change anything at a golf club agm with 51 percent.


----------



## Val (Mar 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			What would the figures be  to make it resounding for you?For me, I'd think 65/35 would be resounding.Which means you think,using recent polling data (something I don't like) that every undecided PLUS some current yes voters are all going to vote No.That's just not going to happen.

This vote will be close, 52/48 is my guess, maybe 51/49.
		
Click to expand...

I would say 65+ would be resounding, Im not using any polling data to say that, it's merely an opinion formed based on speaking to friends family and colleagues. I can count on 1 hand how many people I know who are going to vote yes.

The NO campaign need a minimum 60% vote IMO or it will raise it's head constantly.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 19, 2014)

fundy said:



			If you genuinely believe that then you should be filling your boots on backing yes at the 4/1 thats available, betting markets dont have it anywhere near as close as you believe
		
Click to expand...


I never said 52/48 to who ;-)

But aye, I've seen the odds and placed my bets.Interestingly, the odds I got last year were double what's on offer now.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 19, 2014)

fundy said:



			If you genuinely believe that then you should be filling your boots on backing yes at the 4/1 thats available, betting markets dont have it anywhere near as close as you believe
		
Click to expand...

The betting markets called the last Scottish election well, didn't they?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I would say 65+ would be resounding, Im not using any polling data to say that, it's merely an opinion formed based on speaking to friends family and colleagues. I can count on 1 hand how many people I know who are going to vote yes.

The NO campaign need a minimum 60% vote IMO or it will raise it's head constantly.
		
Click to expand...

The family/friends thing is also interesting.I'm the opposite to you.I know of 4/5 folk who will deffo be voting No and nothing will change that.I know a good few undecideds who could go either way, but the vast majority of my friends/family are voting yes.

Is it a class thing, a religious thing, a regional thing?

I'll pay your subs if No gets 65+....


----------



## williamalex1 (Mar 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			aye, because the westminster elite with tax breaks and endorsing tax avoidance of billions really are united we stand with the food bank users of easterhouse and pilton,eh?
		
Click to expand...

Doesn't effect me mate I'm independently wealthy, after my lotto win.:rofl:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 19, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Doesn't effect me mate I'm independently wealthy, after my lotto win.:rofl:
		
Click to expand...

but you get my point?United we stand with a collection of politicians, all of who are privately educated and seriously rich running the country, and todays evidence of the budget being about savers/elderly and not really about the poor and sick doesn't reflect, on the whole, Scottish society very well?


----------



## One Planer (Mar 19, 2014)

Ask a silly question.

If all the people who were/are undecided didn't vote. What would the Yes/No %'age split be?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Mar 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			but you get my point?United we stand with a collection of politicians, all of who are privately educated and seriously rich running the country, and todays evidence of the budget being about savers/elderly and not really about the poor and sick doesn't reflect, on the whole, Scottish society very well?
		
Click to expand...

Errm, yeah, 'cos we don't have any of them elderly savers up here!?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I've heard this a lot but what puzzles me is who said anything would change if we vote NO in Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

And likewise who from BT or Westminster has guaranteed that it won't.  Because until you hear that then voting NO (as for what BT say about voting YES) you do not really know what you are voting for.


----------



## Val (Mar 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The family/friends thing is also interesting.I'm the opposite to you.I know of 4/5 folk who will deffo be voting No and nothing will change that.I know a good few undecideds who could go either way, but the vast majority of my friends/family are voting yes.

Is it a class thing, a religious thing, a regional thing?

I'll pay your subs if No gets 65+....
		
Click to expand...

Wow, you are confident.

Can't say if it's a class/religious/regional thing at all, we'll find out in September I suppose.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			but you get my point?United we stand with *a collection of politicians, all of who are privately educated* and seriously rich running the country, and todays evidence of the budget being about savers/elderly and not really about the poor and sick doesn't reflect, on the whole, Scottish society very well?
		
Click to expand...

You are Guff-ing! Again!


----------



## Val (Mar 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And likewise who from BT or Westminster has guaranteed that it won't.  Because until you hear that then voting NO (as for what BT say about voting YES) you do not really know what you are voting for.
		
Click to expand...

Well lets be honest, until someone say it will change which they haven't then there will be no change.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			You are Guff-ing! Again!
		
Click to expand...

Guffed his way through 130 pages but hey oh it's good fun. Next time he crosses the Tamar he needs to look right to see how losing Faslane will effect RUK.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 19, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Guffed his way through 130 pages but hey oh it's good fun. Next time he crosses the Tamar he needs to look right to see how losing Faslane will effect RUK.
		
Click to expand...

The Tamar is a river?I don't get the connection?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The Tamar is a river?I don't get the connection?
		
Click to expand...

RN Devonport is there.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			RN Devonport is there.
		
Click to expand...

A little more than that now, but go and play China Fleet (a nice track) and on the way over the bridge glance to your right.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 20, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			A little more than that now, but go and play China Fleet (a nice track) and on the way over the bridge glance to your right.
		
Click to expand...

Or even St Mellion.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 20, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Or even St Mellion.
		
Click to expand...

Most miss out China Fleet becuase of St Mellion but its well worth a play once passed the 1st.  Also has good golfers accomm on site.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 20, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Guffed his way through 130 pages but hey oh it's good fun. Next time he crosses the Tamar he needs to look right to see how losing Faslane will effect RUK.
		
Click to expand...

You are very welcome to Trident and the Â£billions it costs. Don't forget the extra costs without iScotland's financial contribution.
I will feel much safer without it.
The jobs lost pale into insignificance when you consider the costs of the nukes.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You are very welcome to Trident and the Â£billions it costs. Don't forget the extra costs without iScotland's financial contribution.
I will feel much safer without it.
The jobs lost pale into insignificance when you consider the costs of the nukes.
		
Click to expand...


Do you want to tell the people whose jobs you have just got rid off ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 20, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Guffed his way through 130 pages but hey oh it's good fun. Next time he crosses the Tamar he needs to look right to see how losing Faslane will effect RUK.
		
Click to expand...

OK,Tamar/Devonport I now get, but the rest is lost on me?Why would we lose Faslane?We'd need somewhere to park our boats,wouldn't we?We'll have some boats I reckon.No nuclear subs,though.Do you mean the nuclear subs could go to Devonport?Possibly.But Faslane isn't the big deal here, is it?Coulport is the problem for you guys.Any idea where you might put that?

That's the Â£1 question.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Coulport is the problem for you guys.Any idea where you might put that?

That's the Â£1 question.
		
Click to expand...

Those facilities are already in use dealing with one of the big black sharks already. And as I said its on the right as you cross the bridge.
I agree on the nuke subs, complete waste of money and space. Anyone who has a nuke and isn't willing to use it as a first response is wasting their time however it would increase the jobs market in the SW which would be welcome.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			We'll have some boats.
		
Click to expand...

Great, even the Irish Navy are sending their boats to Davenport and Appledore for repair and refit. Send them on down.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 20, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Those facilities are already in use dealing with one of the big black sharks already. And as I said its on the right as you cross the bridge.
I agree on the nuke subs, complete waste of money and space. Anyone who has a nuke and isn't willing to use it as a first response is wasting their time however it would increase the jobs market in the SW which would be welcome.
		
Click to expand...

Based on this reply I'll work on the basis you have no idea what coulport is.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 20, 2014)

Coulport is currently the place in the UK to store the warheads for Trident Missile System and docking 

At the moment it is the only place to do so but it's not 100% certain they can't be housed anywhere else - areas have been looked into


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 20, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Most miss out China Fleet becuase of St Mellion but its well worth a play once passed the 1st.  Also has good golfers accomm on site.
		
Click to expand...

And for those with a serious slice - like my f-ex-law - St M (Nicklaus) can be unplayable! Never stopped the sod from carving 3 woods to the Green and single-putting though, the bandit! CF was on the radar, but a bit of a trek from Snozzle. I'd have been a wreck too. He drove an Alfa in typical Alfa style! 

Back OT.. It is indeed the Nuclear Warheads that are/would be the issue for any move. However, given that much of the missile servicing/maintenance is carried out in US anyway, a simple extension of that arrangement would seem reasonably practical all round!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 20, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And for those with a serious slice - like my f-ex-law - St M (Nicklaus) can be unplayable! Never stopped the sod from carving 3 woods to the Green and single-putting though, the bandit! CF was on the radar, but a bit of a trek from Snozzle. I'd have been a wreck too. He drove an Alfa in typical Alfa style! 

Back OT.. It is indeed the Nuclear Warheads that are/would be the issue for any move. However, given that much of the missile servicing/maintenance is carried out in US anyway, a simple extension of that arrangement would seem reasonably practical all round!
		
Click to expand...

Haven't they already got a nuclear bunker down Westminster way?


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Based on this reply I'll work on the basis you have no idea what coulport is.
		
Click to expand...

Work on what you like, I didn't enjoy my stay there.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 20, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Back OT.. It is indeed the Nuclear Warheads that are/would be the issue for any move. However, given that much of the missile servicing/maintenance is carried out in US anyway, a simple extension of that arrangement would seem reasonably practical all round!
		
Click to expand...

Would be the final answer


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 20, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Coulport is currently the place in the UK to store the warheads for Trident Missile System and docking 

At the moment it is the only place to do so but it's not 100% certain they can't be housed anywhere else - areas have been looked into
		
Click to expand...

It's 100% they can't be housed anywhere else in the UK just now, and storing them elsewhere contravenes loads of international laws, so France and America are out as options...unless you can provide a link proving otherwise?

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmscotaf/676/67607.htm


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 20, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			However, given that much of the missile servicing/maintenance is carried out in US anyway, a simple extension of that arrangement would seem reasonably practical all round!
		
Click to expand...

There is a very simple reason why this is the case, the missiles aren't ours.  The warheads are but not the missiles themselves.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 20, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And for those with a serious slice - like my f-ex-law - St M (Nicklaus) can be unplayable! Never stopped the sod from carving 3 woods to the Green and single-putting though, the bandit! CF was on the radar, but a bit of a trek from Snozzle. I'd have been a wreck too. He drove an Alfa in typical Alfa style! 

Back OT.. It is indeed the Nuclear Warheads that are/would be the issue for any move. However, given that much of the missile servicing/maintenance is carried out in US anyway, a simple extension of that arrangement would seem reasonably practical all round!
		
Click to expand...

missiles and warheads, two separate things.

I thought there was military folk on here who knew what they were talking about,clearly not!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			missiles and warheads, two separate things.

I thought there was military folk on here who knew what they were talking about,clearly not!
		
Click to expand...


I believe Foxholer isn't military 

I could be wrong


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			missiles and warheads, two separate things.

I thought there was military folk on here who knew what they were talking about,clearly not!
		
Click to expand...

My apologies I appear to be starting to have senior momentswhich went from bad to worse when I mixed the big bang theory with cruise.


----------



## williamalex1 (Mar 20, 2014)

Old Skier said:



My apologies I appear to be starting to have senior momentswhich went from bad to worse when I mixed the big bang theory with cruise.

Click to expand...

The only cruise we have is on the Waverley


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 20, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I believe Foxholer isn't military 

I could be wrong
		
Click to expand...

No. You are correct.


Adi2Dassler said:



			missiles and warheads, two separate things.

I thought there was military folk on here who knew what they were talking about,clearly not!
		
Click to expand...

See above.

I used to think you knew what you were talking about too, but that has changed somewhat during this thread!

I *do* know the difference between Warheads and Missile, which is precisely why I used the separate terms. I've only a vague idea where the warheads are 'serviced'. It's the storage of them that's likely to be the most contentious.

Are you military btw?


stevie_r said:



			There is a very simple reason why this is the case, the missiles aren't ours.  The warheads are but not the missiles themselves.
		
Click to expand...

I did/do know that too! But possibly worth pointing it out.

Having the warheads 'not ours' would be 'progress' - though not sufficient - from some folks pov too.


----------



## ger147 (Mar 20, 2014)

So when you said...



Foxholer said:



			It is indeed the Nuclear Warheads that are/would be the issue for any move. However, given that much of the missile servicing/maintenance is carried out in US anyway, a simple extension of that arrangement would seem reasonably practical all round!
		
Click to expand...

...you were not suggesting that the US could look after the warheads for us?  If so, what did you mean?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 20, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Are you military btw?
		
Click to expand...

No, I'm not brave enough, and that's the truth.

and the military dig (because it was) was meant to be directed at skier, I mistakenly quoted you in error.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 20, 2014)

Its unreasonable to think that following a 'Yes' vote nuclear Subs will have to be shifted out of Scotland overnight.  There would have to be a schedule of events just as there would be with all other shared public services.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			No, I'm not brave enough, and that's the truth.

and the military dig (because it was) was meant to be directed at skier.
		
Click to expand...

Dig away, unlike the Yes side I'm big enough to own up to a mistake  even on the internet.

My skin is thick but my armour was thicker


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 20, 2014)

ger147 said:



			So when you said...



...you were not suggesting that the US could look after the warheads for us?  If so, what did you mean?
		
Click to expand...

Well, there are all sorts of scenarios.

What's wrong with using US maintained nuclear warheads though? Apart from the fact that it's the UK's only Nuclear Weapon program! They (the US) maintain the Ballistic ones.

Btw. I've played Tennis at AWE Aldermarston and Hockey at AWRE Harwell several times. Eerie places!


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 20, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, there are all sorts of scenarios.

What's wrong with using US maintained nuclear warheads though? Apart from the fact that it's the UK's only Nuclear Weapon program! They (the US) maintain the Ballistic ones.

Btw. I've played Tennis at AWE Aldermarston and Hockey at AWRE Harwell several times. Eerie places!
		
Click to expand...

Because It's our independent nuclear deterrent, why would you want it kept in the hands of some other nation?


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 20, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Because It's our independent nuclear deterrent, why would you want it kept in the hands of some other nation?
		
Click to expand...

I did point that out.

Though *having* them is the 'deterrent', not designing/building/storing them.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 20, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Because It's our independent nuclear deterrent, why would you want it kept in the hands of some other nation?
		
Click to expand...

Although it wasn't for maintenance the Yanks were happy to have there missiles and warheads guarded and watched over by another nations military force when they were in Germany.


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 20, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Although it wasn't for maintenance the Yanks were happy to have there missiles and warheads guarded and watched over by another nations military force when they were in Germany.
		
Click to expand...

And when cruise was at Greenham.  There are tactical and strategic reasons for having certain weapons in certain geographical locations.


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 20, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I did point that out.

Though *having* them is the 'deterrent', not designing/building/storing them.
		
Click to expand...

see #1327


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 20, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Because It's our independent nuclear deterrent, why would you want it kept in the hands of some other nation?
		
Click to expand...




stevie_r said:



			And when cruise was at Greenham.  There are tactical and strategic reasons for having certain weapons in certain geographical locations.
		
Click to expand...




stevie_r said:



			see #1327
		
Click to expand...

So it's not really *our* nuclear deterrent anyway! The delivery system certainly isn't!


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 20, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			So it's not really *our* nuclear deterrent anyway! The delivery system certainly isn't!
		
Click to expand...

IMHO I always felt politically it was never *our *&#8203;nuclear deterrent but that's for another thread


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 20, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			So it's not really *our* nuclear deterrent anyway! The delivery system certainly isn't!
		
Click to expand...

It is, our warheads and the delivery system is leased.  Same as anything that you lease it is yours to pretty much do with as you please during the period of that lease.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 20, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			So it's not really *our* nuclear deterrent anyway! The delivery system certainly isn't!
		
Click to expand...

Its only our deterrent if we have the power to use it.  It matters not who owns it the issue is who can press the button.


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 20, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Its only our deterrent if we have the power to use it.  It matters not who owns it the issue is who can press the button.
		
Click to expand...

Which is the PM or his nominated survivor.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 20, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Which is the PM or his nominated survivor.
		
Click to expand...

Gideon with his finger on the button..........another great reason for a yes vote.


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Gideon with his finger on the button..........another great reason for a yes vote.
		
Click to expand...

It's been terrible hasn't, the amount of nuclear missiles launched all over the planet by a succession of incompetent PMs. :mmm:


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Gideon with his finger on the button..........another great reason for a yes vote.
		
Click to expand...



So if Millipead (or whoever) presses it in the future you think an iSoctland wont get nuked!


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 20, 2014)




----------



## Old Skier (Mar 20, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			So if Millipead (or whoever) presses it in the future you think an iSoctland wont get nuked!   

Click to expand...

I never knew that wall was so good


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 20, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			It is, our warheads and the delivery system is leased.  Same as anything that you lease it is yours to pretty much do with as you please during the period of that lease.
		
Click to expand...

You missed the subtlety of my post, probably not helped by my second sentence. - refer #1330

But...Back to Scotland.

If it's a Yes and they take the Subs away, we could always just Nuke them! We've been shooting and dumping (sorry, placing!) Depleted Uranium in various parts of it over the years anyway!


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 20, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			You missed the subtlety of my post, probably not helped by my second sentence. - refer #1330
		
Click to expand...

Nothing subtle just, well, not particularly accurate.


----------



## Val (Mar 20, 2014)

The majority of Scottish people won't have the nuclear deterent at the front of their minds when deciding how to vote, there are far larger pressing matters affecting day to day life to think about


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 20, 2014)

Valentino said:



			The majority of Scottish people won't have the nuclear deterent at the front of their minds when deciding how to vote, there are far larger pressing matters affecting day to day life to think about
		
Click to expand...

Unless they work at Clyde and their jobs could be on the line


----------



## Val (Mar 20, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Unless they work at Clyde and their jobs could be on the line
		
Click to expand...

Fair point, so a NO vote there but in the grand scale of things it's way down the list in terms if currency etc


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 20, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Fair point, so a NO vote there but in the grand scale of things it's way down the list in terms if currency etc
		
Click to expand...

I thought getting the nukes out of Scotland was quite high up in priorities Val ? :mmm:


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 20, 2014)

Valentino said:



			The majority of Scottish people won't have the nuclear deterent at the front of their minds when deciding how to vote, there are far larger pressing matters affecting day to day life to think about
		
Click to expand...

Agreed. Which is one of the 'disadvantages' of the 'broad brush' approach or Elections and this referendum. The White Paper states that Trident will go if the vote is Yes. That may or may not be the wish of Yes (or even the No) voters, but it comes as a bundle!


----------



## Val (Mar 20, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I thought getting the nukes out of Scotland was quite high up in priorities Val ? :mmm:
		
Click to expand...

I don't see it as that, I don't think many do as they've been here that long, there are more pressing concerns


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 21, 2014)

I wonder what support there would be if there was a vote for England to pull out of the UK?
This would be on the assumption that only English residents get a vote.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 21, 2014)

If Scotland become independent does that mean they would no longer be able to hold the open ?


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 21, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			If Scotland become independent does that mean they would no longer be able to hold the open ?
		
Click to expand...

With true Scottish foresight (or is that narrow-mindedness) they named it The Open, rather than The British Open. So the question should really be 'would any English (or Irish) course be able to hold The Open?'


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			If Scotland become independent does that mean they would no longer be able to hold the open ?
		
Click to expand...

Probably.No more Carnoustie,Troon,Turnberry,Muirfield or St.Andrews.Given the level of fear being projected and doubt being cast, I doubt golf would survive in an independent Scotland, we might as well start crofting on these courses today.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 22, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			I wonder what support there would be if there was a vote for England to pull out of the UK?
This would be on the assumption that only English residents get a vote.
		
Click to expand...

Probably quite high.

Personally I would be opposed but if we could separate ourselves from London and the South East there might be an attraction!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 22, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			I wonder what support there would be if there was a vote for England to pull out of the UK?
This would be on the assumption that only English residents get a vote.
		
Click to expand...

Landslide victory for iEngland.And yet apparently England doesn't want iScotland, go figure.

#egomaniacs


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Landslide victory for iEngland.And yet apparently England doesn't want iScotland, go figure.

#egomaniacs
		
Click to expand...

I disagree. 

The majority of the English residents I speak to are totally indifferent to Scottish independence and those that do express an opinion tend towards the "good riddance" point of view.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 22, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			I disagree. 

The majority of the English residents I speak to are totally indifferent to Scottish independence and those that do express an opinion tend towards the "good riddance" point of view.
		
Click to expand...

That's contrary to polls I've seen, will try and find them and post them..


----------



## rosecott (Mar 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			If Scotland become independent does that mean they would no longer be able to hold the open ?
		
Click to expand...

It may have escaped your notice but the R&A - who run the Open - is based in St Andrews.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 22, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			I disagree. 

The majority of the English residents I speak to are totally indifferent to Scottish independence and those that do express an opinion tend towards the "good riddance" point of view.
		
Click to expand...

Think the point was not of English voters voting for an iScotland (and on that you may be right - they'd probably vote to keep Scotland in the UK), but that given the chance English voters might well vote for an iEngland - most likely on the grounds that it would result in an iEngland being hoofed out of the EU and having to apply to reenter  - something that would of course be opposed by Mr Barosso.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 22, 2014)

rosecott said:



			It may have escaped your notice but the R&A - who run the Open - is based in St Andrews.
		
Click to expand...

Isn't St Andrews town effectively an English enclave already though


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			England being hoofed out of the EU and having to apply to reenter  - something that would of course be opposed by Mr Barosso.
		
Click to expand...

If only.  But you know that as one of the two major nett contributors the chances of that are slimmer than Scotland ever winning a football World Cup


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			England being hoofed out of the EU and having to apply to reenter  - something that would of course be opposed by Mr Barosso.
		
Click to expand...

Yes please....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 22, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			If only.  But you know that as one of the two major nett contributors the chances of that are slimmer than Scotland ever winning a football World Cup
		
Click to expand...

Interesting that you think that in respect of EU membership an iEngland would be treated differently than an iScotland.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Think the point was not of English voters voting for an iScotland (and on that you may be right - they'd probably vote to keep Scotland in the UK), but that given the chance English voters might well vote for an iEngland - most likely on the grounds that it would result in an iEngland being hoofed out of the EU and having to apply to reenter  - something that would of course be opposed by Mr Barosso.
		
Click to expand...

It seems that I have not made myself clear.

In my experience the majority of English residents would not vote for Scotland remaining within the UK as they are largely indifferent to that issue.
If, however, those same people were offered the chance to divorce England from the rest of the country they would, sadly, vote in favour.

I say sadly because,personally, I am in favour of the Union.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Interesting that you think that in respect of EU membership an iEngland would be treated differently than an iScotland.
		
Click to expand...

 Damn French will change the rules just so they don't have to up their payments to the gravy train. I doubt if we did have to reapply we have a political party with the gonads to even suggest it.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Probably.No more Carnoustie,Troon,Turnberry,Muirfield or St.Andrews.Given the level of fear being projected and doubt being cast, I doubt golf would survive in an independent Scotland, we might as well start crofting on these courses today.
		
Click to expand...

Is crofting like cottaging with Kilts?


----------



## USER1999 (Mar 22, 2014)

If the home counties could vote for independence, that would be something! No propping up the rest of bankrupt UK!


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 22, 2014)

murphthemog said:



			If the home counties could vote for independence, that would be something! No propping up the rest of bankrupt UK!
		
Click to expand...

My how we would miss the Home Counties! 

Packed full of bankers, media types and spurious consultants.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 22, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			My how we would miss the Home Counties! 

Packed full of bankers, media types and spurious consultants.
		
Click to expand...

...and me, and richart, and hawkeye etc etc We're not all like that nefarious bunch you mention - some of us are golfers


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and me, and richart, and hawkeye etc etc We're not all like that nefarious bunch you mention - some of us are golfers 

Click to expand...

Escape!!

Before it is too late.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 22, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Escape!!

Before it is too late.
		
Click to expand...

But where can I go up north without my yellow Lamborghini marking me out as being from the Home Counties?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But where can I go up north without my yellow Lamborghini marking me out as being from the Home Counties?
		
Click to expand...

Leave it behind, you would not be able to use it up here anyway, it would scare the horses.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 23, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			With true Scottish foresight (or is that narrow-mindedness) they named it The Open, rather than The British Open. So the question should really be 'would any English (or Irish) course be able to hold The Open?'
		
Click to expand...


Certainly an interesting scenario 

Possibly the Open is played only in Scotland then and an English or UK one is started and becomes a major ?


----------



## 19thagain (Mar 24, 2014)

I do have concerns once we have independence, I trust our man on charge takes measures to restrict the number of English coming in on a tourist visa and overstaying their time.

The English must be viewed the same way as Romanians are viewed in the Home Counties.

If they are allowed in in large numbers, our system could creak and be less efficient.

I trust immediate steps will be taken as, with not being an EU member, no freedom of travel as a law, will exist.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 24, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Certainly an interesting scenario 

Possibly the Open is played only in Scotland then and an English or UK one is started and becomes a major ?
		
Click to expand...

Why seek to create an issue out of nothing?The Open will continue to be played at the courses on the rota currently, it'll be run by The R&A, there will be qualifying as per just now and we'll all still enjoy watching the best tournament in world golf.

It's getting to the stage where I dunno if unionists suggestion are tongue in cheek or genuine.


----------



## Snaggy (Mar 24, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			If Scotland become independent does that mean they would no longer be able to hold the open ?
		
Click to expand...

The Scots are voting on leaving the United Kingdom, not Britain.  Scotland will still be in Britain, unless they have some fiendish plan to cut themselves loose.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 24, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Is crofting like cottaging with Kilts?
		
Click to expand...

My post of the year so far!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 27, 2014)

Quite an interesting point of view relating to the need/desire of replacing Trident...

http://www.newstatesman.com/voices/...k-replace-trident-or-be-real-military-partner


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Quite an interesting point of view relating to the need/desire of replacing Trident...

http://www.newstatesman.com/voices/...k-replace-trident-or-be-real-military-partner

Click to expand...

Interesting view from CND and "one" US person

It's also nearly a year old now and the world is currently changing with Russia flexing their muscles currently 

I'll prefer to have a nuclear deterant


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 28, 2014)

Interesting listening to representatives of the power companies using a version of the BT campaign threat/fear strategy around the 'big six' competition inquiry due to report in 2015-16.  So the 'big six' tell us that due to uncertainty around the outcome of the inquiry there is a risk of power cuts?   Do we really believe that?  Do we believe government would allow it?


----------



## Snaggy (Mar 28, 2014)

I believe the government would be powerless to stop it happening, one of the downfalls of selling your power generation to the highest (foreign) bidder


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 28, 2014)

Interesting interview by a SNP MP yesterday on BBC breakfast news stating that unlike RUK, Scotland would not wish to leave the EU to become an isolated small country with no voice.

I am not sure where she gets the idea that RUK wishes to leave the EU or why she takes it as given that iscot will be in the EU.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Interesting listening to representatives of the power companies using a version of the BT campaign threat/fear strategy around the 'big six' competition inquiry due to report in 2015-16.  So the 'big six' tell us that due to uncertainty around the outcome of the inquiry there is a risk of power cuts?   Do we really believe that?  Do we believe government would allow it?
		
Click to expand...

Why would the big six make any major investment without knowing the cost of what may happen after any inquiry. The government wouldn't have any say in the matter prior to this by which time it will be to late. Unfortunately we cannot go around acting like Russia and just snaffle up major industries on a whim, crikey, we have even let a third of Scots decide on independence.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 28, 2014)

Well crafted little advert that the Yes guys put out last night

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NclkfOjQle0&list=UUNCYgMsUroKqQ-dGce5StFg


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 28, 2014)

Enjoyed the music, shame nothing else was based on facts.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 28, 2014)

old skier said:



			enjoyed the music, shame nothing else was based on facts.
		
Click to expand...

we need facts!


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



we need facts!

Click to expand...

Just enjoy the music then I say.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



we need facts!

Click to expand...

No you don't!

Advertising for this sort of thing - like Cars, Beer, Cigs (I can just about remember them) - work best when it's image/emotion/aspirations that are appealed to.

Facts just encourage debate, so counter-productive to getting the message across!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 28, 2014)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SL-7Syf9gmA

Spot on......we all know Malborough man.

And the advert associated to the Cranberries song.


----------



## CMAC (Mar 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well crafted little advert that the Yes guys put out last night

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NclkfOjQle0&list=UUNCYgMsUroKqQ-dGce5StFg

Click to expand...

Hadn't seen that till now.


That was an excellent advert if it was put together by the 4th form! who wanted to show a happy clappy well off family [in colour] and the real world [booo] in black and white.

I suppose they are hoping to get the 16 year olds votes so save time and get One direction in a 5 sec advert and thats that sewn up!


Embarrassing effort by the 'dence' brigade. On a positive note if thats the best they have started with, the No's might as well just keep their advertising budget for drinks after the voting has taken place.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 28, 2014)

The No brigade just seem to be sitting on their bazookies doing nothing and saying nothing positive.
Might work, but there again they may have misjudged the mood.
The Commonwealth Games/Ryder Cup looks like a plus for the yes camp.
The Bannockburn 700 thing looks like it will be a disaster, perhaps that was planned.
Still going to be a close call I think.
My still undecided vote may just be the one to swing it either way!


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The No brigade just seem to be sitting on their bazookies doing nothing and saying nothing positive.!
		
Click to expand...

While the Yes campaign fail to give any real detail on how it's all going to work. Cluster muck on both sides.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well crafted little advert that the Yes guys put out last night

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NclkfOjQle0&list=UUNCYgMsUroKqQ-dGce5StFg

Click to expand...

filmed in my town with kids from my kids school, porty rules



Old Skier said:



			While the Yes campaign fail to give any real detail on how it's all going to work. Cluster muck on both sides.
		
Click to expand...

we need detail!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 29, 2014)

Oops wee leak from the government re the shared Â£.
First to blink?


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Oops wee leak from the government re the shared Â£.
First to blink?
		
Click to expand...


It would seem you get to keep trident in return...

There's lucky for you...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Oops wee leak from the government re the shared Â£.
First to blink?
		
Click to expand...

Oops

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26791763

*In a joint statement, George Osborne and Danny Alexander said: "There will not be a currency union in the event of independence. The only way to keep the UK pound is to stay in the UK. Walking out of the UK means walking out of the UK pound.

"A currency union will not work because it would not be in Scotland's interests and would not be in the UK's interests.

"Scotland would have no control over mortgage rates, and would be binding its hands on tax and funding for vital public services."

The statement added: "The Scottish government are proposing to divorce the rest of the UK but want to keep the joint bank account and credit card.

"The UK would not put its taxpayers at risk of bailing out a foreign country and its banks. Parliament wouldn't pass it, and the people wouldn't accept it.

"Any suggestion to the contrary is wrong."*


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 29, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			It would seem you get to keep trident in return...

There's lucky for you...
		
Click to expand...

Been saying for months we get our currency union and rUK keep strident in Faslane, 10 year deal allowing us to build up credit ratings etc and rUK time to build alternative to Faslane/Coulport....why they don't come out and say this is mystifying as it would remove the tension and sniping


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 29, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Been saying for months we get our currency union and rUK keep strident in Faslane, 10 year deal allowing us to build up credit ratings etc and rUK time to build alternative to Faslane/Coulport....why they don't come out and say this is mystifying as it would remove the tension and sniping
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps there is some concern on how those south of the wall might perceive the 'deal' as being a double win for those north of the wall...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 29, 2014)

Pity for that coalition minister that you can't unthink thoughts - unless that is you live in the world of doublethink.  

Then listening to the Scottish secretary this morning go on about how 'sterling zone will NOT happen'.  Of course he can be as absolute about this as BT want him to be - because if he is wrong and we find all along that the government WAS considering a sterling zone and he was telling porkies - then no big deal for him as he won't have a job to lose - unless he becomes the rUK Ambassador to Scotland


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 29, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Been saying for months we get our currency union and rUK keep strident in Faslane, 10 year deal allowing us to build up credit ratings etc and rUK time to build alternative to Faslane/Coulport....why they don't come out and say this is mystifying as it would remove the tension and sniping
		
Click to expand...

Pretty obvious that it will be part of the deal........was it Vince do you think?
Sort of thing he is becoming famous for.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Pretty obvious that it will be part of the deal........was it Vince do you think?
Sort of thing he is becoming famous for.
		
Click to expand...

Im guessing you didnt read this 
*
 In a joint statement, George Osborne and Danny Alexander said: "There will not be a currency union in the event of independence. The only way to keep the UK pound is to stay in the UK. Walking out of the UK means walking out of the UK pound.

"A currency union will not work because it would not be in Scotland's interests and would not be in the UK's interests.

"Scotland would have no control over mortgage rates, and would be binding its hands on tax and funding for vital public services."

The statement added: "The Scottish government are proposing to divorce the rest of the UK but want to keep the joint bank account and credit card.

"The UK would not put its taxpayers at risk of bailing out a foreign country and its banks. Parliament wouldn't pass it, and the people wouldn't accept it.

"Any suggestion to the contrary is wrong"*


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Pretty obvious that it will be part of the deal........was it Vince do you think?
Sort of thing he is becoming famous for.
		
Click to expand...

Is it the N or the O that you don't understand in there will be no currency union.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 29, 2014)

Since when has anyone trusted a Tory politician to tell the truth.
A Yes vote for Scotland and they will be spinning like tops.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 29, 2014)

So you want people to give you answers and when they do you just ignore them ( mainly because they dont fit in with any ideas that you may have ) :thup:


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Since when has anyone trusted a Tory politician to tell the truth.
A Yes vote for Scotland and they will be spinning like tops.
		
Click to expand...

About as often as one should trust any politician Lib Dem, Labour & SNP included. After all the statement on currency union was supported by Danny Alexander and Ed Balls.

Oh! and forget Vince Cable he is regarded down here as a political opportunist of the worst kind.


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 29, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So you want people to give you answers and when they do you just ignore them ( mainly because they dont fit in with any ideas that you may have ) :thup:
		
Click to expand...

And that in a nutshell has been the Yes strategy.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Since when has anyone trusted a Tory politician to tell the truth.
A Yes vote for Scotland and they will be spinning like tops.
		
Click to expand...

So you trust the others then, the SNP sound like the right ones for you then.

Perhaps, just perhaps, you cannot have currency union with RUK and are not accepted into the EU. What is the nationalists plan B.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 29, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Perhaps there is some concern on how those south of the wall might perceive the 'deal' as being a double win for those north of the wall...
		
Click to expand...

True, but I can't see any other solution to the two major issues.Unless rUK wants to abandon nuclear weapons,the seat on the security council and all the added wee bits, they'll have to offer some sort of compromise to Scotland to allow the ongoing use of Coulport.

Lets go thru the process.

Scotland votes Yes
We ask to negotiate a currency union
Westminster say under no conditions will there be a currency union
Scotland adopt Euro
Westminster enquire as to the possibility of coulport continuing operating
Scotland say no, remove your nuclear weapons within the next month
Westminster have no alternative site to store weapons and marry them to missiles
Westminster have no alternative but to announce they are dismantling their nukes

Now, can anyone show me the winner, on either side of the border, in that scenario?




MetalMickie said:



			Is it the N or the O that you don't understand in there will be no currency union.
		
Click to expand...




Liverpoolphil said:



			So you want people to give you answers and when they do you just ignore them ( mainly because they dont fit in with any ideas that you may have ) :thup:
		
Click to expand...




MetalMickie said:



			About as often as one should trust any politician Lib Dem, Labour & SNP included. After all the statement on currency union was supported by Danny Alexander and Ed Balls.

Oh! and forget Vince Cable he is regarded down here as a political opportunist of the worst kind.
		
Click to expand...

So you don't believe politicians, but believe them when they tell you there will be no currency union?Thats quite selective, is it not?


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 29, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			True, but I can't see any other solution to the two major issues.Unless rUK wants to abandon nuclear weapons,the seat on the security council and all the added wee bits, they'll have to offer some sort of compromise to Scotland to allow the ongoing use of Coulport.

Lets go thru the process.

Scotland votes Yes
We ask to negotiate a currency union
Westminster say under no conditions will there be a currency union
Scotland adopt Euro
Westminster enquire as to the possibility of coulport continuing operating
Scotland say no, remove your nuclear weapons within the next month
Westminster have no alternative site to store weapons and marry them to missiles
Westminster have no alternative but to announce they are dismantling their nukes

Now, can anyone show me the winner, on either side of the border, in that scenario?








So you don't believe politicians, but believe them when they tell you there will be no currency union?Thats quite selective, is it not?
		
Click to expand...

So what makes you so absolutely certain that the UK won't be able to construct a new 'Coulport' somewhere down south?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 29, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			So what makes you so absolutely certain that the UK won't be able to construct a new 'Coulport' somewhere down south?
		
Click to expand...

They could, but it'll take 10 years or more, according to those who know.But you need to find a suitable place first,which according to the info I've read, is nearly impossible...all the sites suggested are too near areas of mass population ( that rule doesn't apply to the clyde, apparently) too near oil refineries or not deep enough water.Then you have to overcome mass local opposition, MP's refusing to allow it to built on their patch, planning etc.Seriously, from what I've read, it's the single most vital essential reason why Westminster are desperate for a No vote.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 29, 2014)

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmscotaf/676/67607.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...force-Britain-to-abandon-nuclear-weapons.html


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 29, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			They could, but it'll take 10 years or more, according to those who know.But you need to find a suitable place first,which according to the info I've read, is nearly impossible...all the sites suggested are too near areas of mass population ( that rule doesn't apply to the clyde, apparently) too near oil refineries or not deep enough water.Then you have to overcome mass local opposition, MP's refusing to allow it to built on their patch, planning etc.Seriously, from what I've read, it's the single most vital essential reason why Westminster are desperate for a No vote.
		
Click to expand...

Do you honestly believe that suitable sites are not already shortlisted? really?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 29, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Do you honestly believe that suitable sites are not already shortlisted? really?
		
Click to expand...

Sites have been shortlisted, but looking at the available documentation from committees, none of them are viable.

Deep water
away from population centres
easily gained planning
limited local opposition

The country has changed since the govt just 'did' coulport, very limited space south of the border

can you suggest two viable locations, just for the sake of whataboutery?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 29, 2014)

To assist, here's a list of deep water ports in GB-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Panamax_ports#Great_Britain

Any of them viable?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 29, 2014)

So you don't believe politicians, but believe them when they tell you there will be no currency union?Thats quite selective, is it not?
		
Click to expand...

[/QUOTE]

I think if you read the posts you will see that it was DfT who (selectively) did not believe politicians.It seems that, to him,Tories alone are not to be believed.

Personally I am prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 29, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Sites have been shortlisted, but looking at the available documentation from committees, none of them are viable.

Deep water
away from population centres
easily gained planning
limited local opposition

The country has changed since the govt just 'did' coulport, very limited space south of the border

can you suggest two viable locations, just for the sake of whataboutery?
		
Click to expand...

If I could be bothered enough to study a map then yes.  What we are talking about here is the UKs nuclear deterrent not a new Tescos, it will go where it needs to go and the local populace will unfortunately have to suck it up.

You seem to think that an independent Scotland holds all the cards because of this issue.  Here's a scenario, fat Eck says he wants the nuclear weapons gone by a a particular date with a ridiculously short time frame, HMG says ok but by that date ensure you have the following agencies set up and working because we won't be doing it for you:

HMRC, CSA, DVLA, Immigration, Benefits agencies, Defence, etc etc etc a huge list.  Scotland, unable to manage this within that time frame collapses before Independence has had a chance.

Or UK says we'll move them as soon as we are able, don't like it? tough.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 29, 2014)

A bit of reality suddenly fills the void.
Salmond did say that it would take a protracted period of negotiation if there was a yes vote.
The rUK is committed to assist Scotland during this period.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



*Since when has anyone trusted a Tory politician* to tell the truth.
A Yes vote for Scotland and they will be spinning like tops.
		
Click to expand...




MetalMickie said:



*About as often as one should trust any politician Lib Dem, Labour & SNP included.* After all the statement on currency union was supported by Danny Alexander and Ed Balls.

Oh! and forget Vince Cable he is regarded down here as a political opportunist of the worst kind.
		
Click to expand...




MetalMickie said:



*I think if you read the posts you will see that it was DfT who (selectively) did not believe politicians*.It seems that, to him,Tories alone are not to be believed.

Personally I am prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong
		
Click to expand...

Er,no, you agreed with him in not trusting politicians, but whatevs.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 29, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			True, but I can't see any other solution to the two major issues.Unless rUK wants to abandon nuclear weapons,the seat on the security council and all the added wee bits, they'll have to offer some sort of compromise to Scotland to allow the ongoing use of Coulport.

Lets go thru the process.

Scotland votes Yes
We ask to negotiate a currency union
Westminster say under no conditions will there be a currency union
Scotland adopt Euro
Westminster enquire as to the possibility of coulport continuing operating
Scotland say no, remove your nuclear weapons within the next month
*Westminster say we are keeping our nuclear weapons where they are for the next ten years. What are you going to do about it?*

Now, can anyone show me the winner, on either side of the border, in that scenario?








So you don't believe politicians, but believe them when they tell you there will be no currency union?Thats quite selective, is it not?
		
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 29, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			If I could be bothered enough to study a map then yes.  What we are talking about here is the UKs nuclear deterrent not a new Tescos, it will go where it needs to go and the local populace will unfortunately have to suck it up.

You seem to think that an independent Scotland holds all the cards because of this issue.  Here's a scenario, fat Eck says he wants the nuclear weapons gone by a a particular date with a ridiculously short time frame, HMG says ok but by that date ensure you have the following agencies set up and working because we won't be doing it for you:

HMRC, CSA, DVLA, Immigration, Benefits agencies, Defence, etc etc etc a huge list.  Scotland, unable to manage this within that time frame collapses before Independence has had a chance.

Or UK says we'll move them as soon as we are able, don't like it? tough.
		
Click to expand...

Does that mean that the headquarters of all of the agencies you mention are based and operate only in England/Wales


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 29, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Er,no, you agreed with him in not trusting politicians, but whatevs.
		
Click to expand...

Clearly the forum is not the place for subtlety or nuance.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 29, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			If I could be bothered enough to study a map then yes.  What we are talking about here is the UKs nuclear deterrent not a new Tescos, it will go where it needs to go and the local populace will unfortunately have to suck it up.

*You seem to think that an independent Scotland holds all the cards because of this issue.*  Here's a scenario, fat Eck says he wants the nuclear weapons gone by a a particular date with a ridiculously short time frame, HMG says ok but by that date ensure you have the following agencies set up and working because we won't be doing it for you:

HMRC, CSA, DVLA, Immigration, Benefits agencies, Defence, etc etc etc a huge list.  Scotland, unable to manage this within that time frame collapses before Independence has had a chance.

Or UK says we'll move them as soon as we are able, don't like it? tough.
		
Click to expand...

No I don't and I've aid as much tonight on this very thread.Currency and Coulport are equally vital, with both sides having an equally strong hand...they both have something the other needs.

I've provided links to various sources backing up my point of view, and I've deliberately used unionists sources to avoid accusations of talking bollocks, but if you decide not to use them,fine, but you contribute nothing but unsubstantiated bollocks,especially your last sentence.

And with that, I'm off to the pub, will check in tomorrow after my team have lost to Hearts.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 29, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Fixed that for you!
		
Click to expand...

How about report you to the UN,get Hans blix and his mates in to dismantle items of sovereign territory.

And I"m deffo off oot now!


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Does that mean that the headquarters of all of the agencies you mention are based and operate only in England/Wales
		
Click to expand...

A significant number, bear in mind that they were just examples plucked at random from the air, there are literally hundreds of agencies that will have to be set up.  In the highly unlikely event of a yes vote there will clearly be a significant amount of give and take.  Scotland would not be in a position to be anything like independent for quite a while; not that it wants to be fully independent anyway .  Therefore, to believe that Scotland holds the one ace (Coulport) is naivety on a staggering scale.

With regard to the amount of agencies Scotland would have to create in order to function, I have for some time thought that the country would struggle to find enough bodies to fill the jobs required.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 29, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			How about report you to the UN,get Hans blix and his mates in to dismantle items of sovereign territory.

And I"m deffo off oot now!
		
Click to expand...

Sounds like you have just come back 

What! After they have finished in the Crimea!     I don't think so and neither do you.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 29, 2014)

Politicians need votes. If any politician wants in, in the unlikely event of a yes vote giving you an iscot, the electorate south of the wall I suspect will not look to kindly on any back peddling or giving in to the SNP. I'm sure there will be a plan B plucked out of the air regarding the nuclear problem.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 29, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			With regard to the amount of agencies Scotland would have to create in order to function, I have for some time thought that the country would struggle to find enough bodies to fill the jobs required.
		
Click to expand...

Goodness me do you really think that we have no tax offices, customs etc in Scotland.


----------



## Crow (Mar 29, 2014)

Hereâ€™s something interesting that my daughter told me the other day, which I assume is true but please tell me if not?

University fees are free to Scottish students, and being a member of the EU they have to make them free to other European countries, including Ireland.  

Students from Wales, Northern Ireland and England, however, have to pay Â£9,000 a year. They make up around 20 to 25% of students in Scotland so thatâ€™s a big chunk of money coming in to support the free places. 

If Scotland becomes independent and stays in the EU then it is almost certain that students from Wales, Northern Ireland and England will challenge this situation and claim free places as well, and if they get them then the number of applicants is likely to rise dramatically, putting a severe financial strain on the universities.


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Goodness me do you really think that we have no tax offices, customs etc in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Watch my hypothetical lips, hundreds of government agencies required to run a country, SIS, Security Services, An Army, Navy, Air force, you will not fill the jobs required.

You limp along currently with 400,000 English expats helping you out.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 29, 2014)

Crow said:



			Hereâ€™s something interesting that my daughter told me the other day, which I assume is true but please tell me if not?

University fees are free to Scottish students, and being a member of the EU they have to make them free to other European countries, including Ireland.  

Students from Wales, Northern Ireland and England, however, have to pay Â£9,000 a year. They make up around 20 to 25% of students in Scotland so thatâ€™s a big chunk of money coming in to support the free places. 

If Scotland becomes independent and stays in the EU then it is almost certain that students from Wales, Northern Ireland and England will challenge this situation and claim free places as well, and if they get them then the number of applicants is likely to rise dramatically, putting a severe financial strain on the universities.
		
Click to expand...

You forgot to mention how much Scottish students pay for attending English Uni's.

We have different priorities, even allowing for free places the Universities in Scotland are very popular and operate at a healthy profit.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Goodness me do you really think that we have no tax offices, customs etc in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Front line/1st level, there may be. And for the likes of Police and a few others there will be little additional infrastructure required. But for things like Tax, Welfare etc, the additional infrastructure - IT systems, Governance Bodies etc - will actually be immense.

Think of them like High Street branches of Banks. The customer facing part of them is by no means the major element. 

IT systems on their own could delay any true independence. No sizeable Government IT project seems to take less than about 2 years just for the bidding process, let alone the actual development. And the 'failure' and overspend rate of developments is seriously high. The Scottish Parliament doesn't have a great track record on 'new build' overspending! I'm sure the likes of Accenture and Capita would love to see another customer for their systems! Hundreds of millions to be made with little real development needed!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 29, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Watch my hypothetical lips, hundreds of government agencies required to run a country, SIS, Security Services, An Army, Navy, Air force, you will not fill the jobs required.

You limp along currently with 400,000 English expats helping you out.
		
Click to expand...

Well thank you very much, I think you will find that most of the English expats have retired to Scotland for a better way of life.

You also seem to forget that the scale of 'jobs to fill' is about a tenth of that required by England. 
With all the job losses you predict from the 'system' being based in England I am sure that we will have no problems filling them.


----------



## NWJocko (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You forgot to mention how much Scottish students pay for attending English Uni's.

We have different priorities, even allowing for free places the Universities in Scotland are very popular and operate at a healthy profit.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure how this is relevant to the point(s) made..?

If Scottish students want to come to an English university they will do so, regardless of independence, and to be honest has no bearing on the point made.

The issue is with the free places becoming more widely available for non Scottish residents, making the universities significantly less profitable....


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well thank you very much, I think you will find that most of the English expats have retired to Scotland for a better way of life.
		
Click to expand...

You are wrong, maybe in crusty village where you live, but across the board no.  
If you can drag the long term unemployed out of the pubs then you might have a chance of filling job slots, good luck. :thup:


----------



## Crow (Mar 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You forgot to mention how much Scottish students pay for attending English Uni's.

We have different priorities, even allowing for free places the Universities in Scotland are very popular and operate at a healthy profit.
		
Click to expand...

I didn't mention Scottish students paying to go to English universities (and I'm assuming Welsh and Northern Irish universities?) as it's got nothing to do with my question, and that situation is unlikely to change whichever way the vote goes.

You say they operate at a healthy profit, do you have figures? 
I'm not looking for an argument, it was just something that I'd not heard of before and found thought provoking.

I'm told that there are roughly 25,000 students in Scotland, taking fees for paying students at Â£9,000 each and 20% of students being from Wales, Northern Ireland and England, that's Â£45,000,000 per year.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 30, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			You are wrong, maybe in crusty village where you live, but across the board no.  
If you can drag the long term unemployed out of the pubs then you might have a chance of filling job slots, good luck. :thup:
		
Click to expand...

If I am wrong perhaps you can provide some figures to prove your point.
400,000 represents about 25% of the Scottish workforce. Or in even more simple terms one in four people working in Scotland is English.


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If I am wrong perhaps you can provide some figures to prove your point.
400,000 represents about 25% of the Scottish workforce. Or in even more simple terms one in four people working in Scotland is English.
		
Click to expand...

The figures on the number of English people living in Scotland is readily available online from the last census.  Your guesstimate of Scotlands' workforce being 1.6 million is way out, it's actually around 2.6 million, again the figures are all available online.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well thank you very much, I think you will find that most of the English expats have retired to Scotland for a better way of life.

You also seem to forget that the scale of 'jobs to fill' is about a tenth of that required by England. 
With all the job losses you predict from the 'system' being based in England I am sure that we will have no problems filling them.
		
Click to expand...

..and you might find some Scottish ex-pats heading back to Scotland to work on setting up the systems and agencies etc.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 30, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			The figures on the number of English people living in Scotland is readily available online from the last census.  Your guesstimate of Scotlands' workforce being 1.6 million is way out, it's actually around 2.6 million, again the figures are all available online.
		
Click to expand...

That will probably be 1.6 million full time and 1 million on 4 hour contracts!.
Sorry got my figures muddled I thought the workforce was around the 2 million mark FT
Still recon 400,000 English workers out of 2.6 million is a very high estimate. One in 6.5. 
Don't see that anywhere around me.

I see the Scottish Secretary has commented that BT could lose. He seems a specially undynamic sort of individual.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 30, 2014)

I note that Carmichael is getting twitchy about the referendum -with the BT/NO campaign not doing enough (anything?) to sell the UK to the Scottish electorate.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...inet-ministers-fears-Scotland-referendum.html

At somer point BT is going to have to start being positive about a NO vote and start extolling the benefits - rather than as they currently are doing - rubbishing a YES.  Looking forward to hearing the benefits - and then hearing BT defending their stated benefits as the YES campaign will be at them.   And BT will have to start being clear about a future Scotland in the UK post a NO.  Just saying they don't have to seems to be losing credibility.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 30, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			You seem to think that an independent Scotland holds all the cards because of this issue. 

*Or UK says we'll move them as soon as we are able, don't like it? tough.*

Click to expand...

Going back to this point.I don't think Scotland holds all the cards on this point, but it's pretty important, of equal standing as the Â£, as I've previously suggested.

So to back to the Â£, no currency union, no Â£ in Scotland, no share of debt, no Scottish contribution to the balance of payments, a reduction in value of sterling and the surrounding issues.All because Westminster said no to a currency union.And you believe Westminster will cut off its nose? 

So, because Westminster refused a CU, rUK has no Coulport or Faslane, a reduction in the value of its currency a short fall in the balance of repayments, a higher debt=population ratio and Scotland has to either use a floating currency,the euro or a new currency.And you think that's realistic?




SocketRocket said:



			Sounds like you have just come back 

*What! After they have finished in the Crimea!     I don't think so and neither do you*.
		
Click to expand...

So to these highlighted points, your both suggesting that if/when Scotland demands that nuclear weapons are removed from our country, rUK will say no, we'll continue to use Faslane until we're good and ready to move them and there's nothing you can do about it?
I know you both made these posts on a Saturday night, and wine and beer can be the undoing of any man, so I'll ask, neither of you were serious,were you?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Going back to this point.I don't think Scotland holds all the cards on this point, but it's pretty important, of equal standing as the Â£, as I've previously suggested.

So to back to the Â£, no currency union, no Â£ in Scotland, no share of debt, no Scottish contribution to the balance of payments, a reduction in value of sterling and the surrounding issues.All because Westminster said no to a currency union.And you believe Westminster will cut off its nose? 

So, because Westminster refused a CU, rUK has no Coulport or Faslane, a reduction in the value of its currency a short fall in the balance of repayments, a higher debt=population ratio and Scotland has to either use a floating currency,the euro or a new currency.And you think that's realistic?




So to these highlighted points, your both suggesting that if/when Scotland demands that nuclear weapons are removed from our country, rUK will say no, we'll continue to use Faslane until we're good and ready to move them and there's nothing you can do about it?
I know you both made these posts on a Saturday night, and wine and beer can be the undoing of any man, so I'll ask, neither of you were serious,were you?
		
Click to expand...

What would Scotland be able to do if the UK did say no - they are staying there until we are ready to move them ?


----------



## Dodger (Mar 30, 2014)

I feel the Yes campaign is gaining momentum up here. Things like this helping no end -


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What would Scotland be able to do if the UK did say no - they are staying there until we are ready to move them ?
		
Click to expand...

Refuse access of our waters/land?
Take rUK to the UN?
Dismantle them?

But lets be serious here,none of the above will happen,are they?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 30, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I feel the Yes campaign is gaining momentum up here. Things like this helping no end -







Click to expand...

Been gaining momentum for  six months, as I've been saying.

Yes will win now, it's a cert.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 30, 2014)

Should the rest of Europe be worried about the imperial leanings of the Yes supporters on this thread.
They demand that RUK runs their monetary policies in line with an iscot.
They demand entry in the EU.
Is anyone else worried about the massed army of iscot pouring over the wall and taking over RUK.
Do they still paint their faces blue.


----------



## Dodger (Mar 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Been gaining momentum for  six months, as I've been saying.

Yes will win now, it's a cert.
		
Click to expand...

I am with you.Plenty people leaning towards it.My old man really believes when push comes to shove people will not vote 'against their nation'.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Been gaining momentum for  six months, as I've been saying.

*Yes will win now, it's a cert*.
		
Click to expand...

Based on ?

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/should-scotland-be-an-independent-country-1#line


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 30, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I feel the Yes campaign is gaining momentum up here. Things like this helping no end -







Click to expand...

At first I didn't believe this front page was real - but apparently it is - and the story certainly is

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...dmits-currency-union-ban-was-a-bluff.23823233


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			At first I didn't believe this front page was real - but apparently it is - and the story certainly is

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...dmits-currency-union-ban-was-a-bluff.23823233

Click to expand...

Its still based on this one minister though isnt it


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Based on ?

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/should-scotland-be-an-independent-country-1#line

Click to expand...


John Curtice is quite simply outstanding as a source, and I mean that sincerely, if you're into polling data.

But you have to know Scottish politics and its disregard for polls...have a look at the lastScottish elections as the perfect example. I base my opinion on first hand experience.

As dodger suggest above, when push comes to shove, folk will think, ach, bugger it, i'm voting aye.People will get behind positivity and shy away from negativity, and as Carmichael has confirmed today, No  is nothing but -


----------



## NWJocko (Mar 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			At first I didn't believe this front page was real - but apparently it is - and the story certainly is

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...dmits-currency-union-ban-was-a-bluff.23823233

Click to expand...

Interesting read. Is the Herald pro Independence out of interest (no leading question intended!)?

It seems that some random has said its possible, hence the strong statement the other day but the SNP have jumped all over it. Good politics, makes it even harder to trust any politician or know who/what to believe when trying to follow this in the media though!!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			John Curtice is quite simply outstanding as a source, and I mean that sincerely, if you're into polling data.

But you have to know Scottish politics and its disregard for polls...have a look at the lastScottish elections as the perfect example. I base my opinion on first hand experience.

As dodger suggest above, when push comes to shove, folk will think, ach, bugger it, i'm voting aye.People will get behind positivity and shy away from negativity, and as Carmichael has confirmed today, No  is nothing but -
		
Click to expand...

But nothing is a cert is it though - there is prob a great deal of people who will be voting No.

There is nothing"confirmed" on what will happen after any yes vote - people wont vote for that uncertainty.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 30, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Interesting read. *Is the Herald pro Independence out of interest* (no leading question intended!)?

It seems that some random has said its possible, hence the strong statement the other day but the SNP have jumped all over it. Good politics, makes it even harder to trust any politician or know who/what to believe when trying to follow this in the media though!!
		
Click to expand...

Yes, but Scotland on Sunday & Observer are highly partisan No publications, check out their front pages today.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			But nothing is a cert is it though - there is prob a great deal of people who will be voting No.

There is nothing"confirmed" on what will happen after any yes vote - people wont vote for that uncertainty.
		
Click to expand...

I can't disagree with any of that, but we'll just wait and see.


----------



## Dodger (Mar 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			But nothing is a cert is it though - there is prob a great deal of people who will be voting No.

There is nothing"confirmed" on what will happen after any yes vote - people wont vote for that uncertainty.
		
Click to expand...

Guy at work was saying 'what are the tax rates going to be'.......no different to any election really.


----------



## NWJocko (Mar 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Yes, but Scotland on Sunday & Observer are highly partisan No publications, check out their front pages today.
		
Click to expand...

Don't have time to read the Sundays anymore and wasnt really related to this, was just interested.

Cheers :thup:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 30, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Guy at work was saying 'what are the tax rates going to be'.......no different to any election really.
		
Click to expand...

Guess need to know what currency will be used first before any tax rates.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			, when push comes to shove, folk will think, ach, bugger it, i'm voting aye.-
		
Click to expand...

Another spoilt ballot paper then.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 30, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Don't have time to read the Sundays anymore and wasnt really related to this, was just interested.

Cheers :thup:
		
Click to expand...

For future ref: STV/Herald - Yes generally, BBC/Scotsman-No generally


----------



## NWJocko (Mar 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			For future ref: STV/Herald - Yes generally, BBC/Scotsman-No generally
		
Click to expand...

Interesting re the papers, does that indicate a wider West/East - Yes/No representation?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 30, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Interesting re the papers, does that indicate a wider West/East - Yes/No representation?
		
Click to expand...

Not sure.Because the polling data of decided voters is tight I think it's evenly spread with maybe a touch more Yes in West


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 30, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Interesting read. Is the Herald pro Independence out of interest (no leading question intended!)?

It seems that some random has said its possible, hence the strong statement the other day but the SNP have jumped all over it. Good politics, makes it even harder to trust any politician or know who/what to believe when trying to follow this in the media though!!
		
Click to expand...

And the comment piece by Iain Macwhirter also in today's SH makes interesting reading also

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comme...e-tide-of-history-is-moving-their-wa.23824878


----------



## NWJocko (Mar 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And the comment piece by Iain Macwhirter also in today's SH makes interesting reading also

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comme...e-tide-of-history-is-moving-their-wa.23824878

Click to expand...

By "interesting" I assume you meant "fiercely biased"!!? :cheers:

Interesting read, although this is all extrapolated from an "unnamed source" whilst those willing to stick their head above the parapet (arguably those making the decisions) are saying the polar,opposite. Not saying which is more believable right enough!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 30, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			By "interesting" I assume you meant "fiercely biased"!!? :cheers:

Interesting read, although this is all extrapolated from an "unnamed source" whilst those willing to stick their head above the parapet (arguably those making the decisions) are saying the polar,opposite. Not saying which is more believable right enough!
		
Click to expand...

I thought he has been pretty much a NO man in the past.


----------



## Val (Mar 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			To assist, here's a list of deep water ports in GB-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Panamax_ports#Great_Britain

Any of them viable?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, Barrow.


----------



## chrisd (Mar 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And the comment piece by Iain Macwhirter also in today's SH makes interesting reading also

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comme...e-tide-of-history-is-moving-their-wa.23824878

Click to expand...

How do you define interesting?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Mar 30, 2014)

chrisd said:



			How do you define interesting?
		
Click to expand...

Interesting as I thought he was more of the NO complexion and for the comment piece to be in the Herald (which is Glasgow and West of Scotland's broadsheet newspaper)


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I know you both made these posts on a Saturday night, and wine and beer can be the undoing of any man, so I'll ask, neither of you were serious,were you?
		
Click to expand...


Deadly!!   We all know that following a hypothetical 'Yes' vote there will be a long period of discussion and planning to separate systems and assets.    Nukes will be a part of that debate and a iScotland demanding a fast removal of nuclear Subs would only trigger tit for tat actions.    It just wont happen.


----------



## Val (Mar 30, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Deadly!!   We all know that following a hypothetical 'Yes' vote there will be a long period of discussion and planning to separate systems and assets.    Nukes will be a part of that debate and a iScotland demanding a fast removal of nuclear Subs would only trigger tit for tat actions.    It just wont happen.
		
Click to expand...

I never thought I'd type this but this man is talking sense, not a chance it will happen.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 30, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I never thought I'd type this but this man is talking sense, not a chance it will happen.



Click to expand...

Thanks.   'Gulp'    :thup:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 31, 2014)

Clegg comparing Salmond to Farage smacks of desperation.... or someone totally out of touch with Scottish politics.

What a disappointment Danny Alexander has turned out to be. He seems to have visited the Margaret Thatcher change of image department.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 31, 2014)

Barrow is the obvious place to move the nukes but I seem to remember an issue with Sellafield [or happy valley or whatever it is called now]


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 31, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Yes, Barrow.
		
Click to expand...

Transportation of nuclear waste from Sellafield and it being a major gas terminal rules it out, according to select committees.



SocketRocket said:



			Deadly!!   We all know that following a hypothetical 'Yes' vote there will be a long period of discussion and planning to separate systems and assets.    Nukes will be a part of that debate and a iScotland demanding a fast removal of nuclear Subs would only trigger tit for tat actions.    It just wont happen.
		
Click to expand...

March 2016.So you were wrong with 'tough', now it's 'long period of discussion'...sounds like you've been taking lessons from Carmichael in the softening of your stance.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Transportation of nuclear waste from Sellafield and it being a major gas terminal rules it out, according to select committees.



March 2016.So you were wrong with 'tough', now it's 'long period of discussion'...sounds like you've been taking lessons from Carmichael in the softening of your stance.
		
Click to expand...

March 2016 

There would be a long period of discussion, if anyone believes any major changes would happen in a short time frame they are deluded.   I repeat!   If an iScottish administration gave a period of short notice to remove the Subs then the response would have to be 'Tough!  we need time'


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 31, 2014)

Socket...you are beginning to sound like Gideon.
Next thing will be all the rUK saying Salmond is just full of bluff and bluster about the Nukes.
The difference is ......he isn't.
A nuclear free Scotland is high on the agenda of iScots.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 31, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			March 2016 

There would be a long period of discussion, if anyone believes any major changes would happen in a short time frame they are deluded.   I repeat!   If an iScottish administration gave a period of short notice to remove the Subs then the response would have to be 'Tough!  we need time'
		
Click to expand...

Apologies, independence day for Scotland, the day when everything really does change, for everyone on this island.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 31, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Socket...you are beginning to sound like Gideon.
Next thing will be all the rUK saying Salmond is just full of bluff and bluster about the Nukes.
The difference is ......he isn't.
A nuclear free Scotland is high on the agenda of iScots.
		
Click to expand...

So the "failed economist" holds all the trump cards.

You really are risking being called delusional. 

Still it will all be irrelevant when the vote is NO.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Apologies, independence day for Scotland, the day when everything really does change, for everyone on this island.
		
Click to expand...

Question.   Do Scots celebrate a St Andrews Day?


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Apologies, independence day for Scotland, the day when everything really does change, for everyone on this island.
		
Click to expand...

As someone who had to go skip across the wall to clear and sort out your rubbish, help bury your dead and crap myself whilst I fought your fires I am at a lose to understand why the noisey minority are so determined to drive a wedge between the Union. The only argument I hear is that you are all p*ssed of with Westminster, well as strange as it may seem, so are the rest off us.

Perhaps someone could tell me in all honesty what this is really all about and how will the nationalist and republicans react if, as seems likely there is a No vote.


----------



## Dodger (Mar 31, 2014)

I find it somewhat amusing that so many people like poking fun at the country for a huge amount of reason and not all of them sport related yet are clinging on for dear life to keep them as part of the UK.

Why?


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 31, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I find it somewhat amusing that so many people like poking fun at the country for a huge amount of reason and not all of them sport related yet are clinging on for dear life to keep them as part of the UK.

Why?
		
Click to expand...

Tiz a national sport from both sides. Get over it.


----------



## Dodger (Mar 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Tiz a national sport from both sides. Get over it.
		
Click to expand...

Over what?

I am genuinely looking for an answer to my question.Care to answer it?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 31, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I find it somewhat amusing that so many people like poking fun at the country for a huge amount of reason and not all of them sport related yet are clinging on for dear life to keep them as part of the UK.

Why?
		
Click to expand...

Im guessing the "poking fun" is actually good natured banter that has gone on for centuries - if it ever came down to it - im pretty sure both countries would be their for each other if ever needed.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 31, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Over what?

I am genuinely looking for an answer to my question.Care to answer it?
		
Click to expand...

Only when you tell me which side is poking fun over which side


----------



## Dodger (Mar 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Only when you tell me which side is poking fun over which side
		
Click to expand...


Well seeing as there has not been many from Engerland saying off you go on your own I would have thought I would not have had to spell that out for you but there you go.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 31, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Well seeing as there has not been many from Engerland saying off you go on your own I would have thought I would not have had to spell that out for you but there you go.
		
Click to expand...

Step away from the Buckies


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 31, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Question.   Do Scots celebrate a St Andrews Day?
		
Click to expand...

A wee bit more than The English celebrate St Georges Day...most English do not even know the date!!


----------



## Dodger (Mar 31, 2014)

Come on guys you have all had  a lot to say on the subject so there must be some reasons that make you want to cling on to that part of the current union?


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 31, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			A wee bit more than The English celebrate St Georges Day...most English do not even know the date!!
		
Click to expand...

Is that a fact?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 31, 2014)

Dodger has asked a very good question.
There is a level of arrogance [or ignorance perhaps, both of which we are well used to] in some of the anti Scotland postings.
I think that those who fall into that category should at least be brave enough to give him an honest answer.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 31, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Is that a fact?
		
Click to expand...

Cue most English posters frantically searching Google.........remember I lived down there for 30 years, St Georges Day generally past unknown to most!!


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			As someone who had to go skip across the wall to clear and sort out your rubbish, help bury your dead and crap myself whilst I fought your fires I am at a lose to understand why the noisey minority are so determined to drive a wedge between the Union. The only argument I hear is that you are all p*ssed of with Westminster, well as strange as it may seem, so are the rest off us....
		
Click to expand...

:clap: :rofl:

And that's post of the week - in a good way!

The only difference is that those of us in England has some ability to do something about - by voting them out! Scotland has already gone as far as it can in that regard, so Self Determination (Independence) is the next step.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 31, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			:clap: :rofl:

And that's post of the week - in a good way!

The only difference is that those of us in England has some ability to do something about - by voting them out! Scotland has already gone as far as it can in that regard, so Self Determination (Independence) is the next step.
		
Click to expand...

Ironically that is not always true as New Labour was re-elected twice on the strength of Scotland's votes when English votes alone would have given a different result.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 31, 2014)

Sums it up nicely Foxy.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 31, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Come on guys you have all had  a lot to say on the subject so there must be some reasons that make you want to cling on to that part of the current union?
		
Click to expand...

I dont want the union to break up - proud of our connection to Scotland and the other nations in the UK. Think the relationship makes us a very strong allie - strength in numbers.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Mar 31, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Ironically that is not always true as New Labour was re-elected twice on the strength of Scotland's votes when English votes alone would have given a different result.
		
Click to expand...

So it was the 30 odd Scottish votes that won the day and not the 250 odd English ones. Get real.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 31, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Dodger has asked a very good question.
*There is a level of arrogance [or ignorance perhaps, both of which we are well used to] in some of the anti Scotland postings.*
I think that those who fall into that category should at least be brave enough to give him an honest answer.
		
Click to expand...

Certainly an accusation that can also be levelled at anti English as well - no one is innocent.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 31, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			A wee bit more than The English celebrate St Georges Day...most English do not even know the date!!
		
Click to expand...

Now your being silly


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 31, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Cue most English posters frantically searching Google.........remember I lived down there for 30 years, St Georges Day generally past unknown to most!!
		
Click to expand...

Ditto a lot of scots, and no, St Andrews day isn't really celebrated, not in comparison with a womanising drunkard poet.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 31, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			not in comparison with a womanising drunkard poet.
		
Click to expand...

Who had a loathing of the Highlander.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 31, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Dodger has asked a very good question.
There is a level of arrogance [or ignorance perhaps, both of which we are well used to] in some of the anti Scotland postings.
I think that those who fall into that category should at least be brave enough to give him an honest answer.
		
Click to expand...

I'd love to know who is deemed in that category. Most of us who are supporting the No campaign are just loyalist. I have only ever classed myself as British and have many English, Scottish and Irish friends. I have never heard a valid argument for and Independant Scotland only a lot of anti British shouting from a noisy minority.

Again I ask what do those on hear who support the Yes campaign think may happen after a No vote.


----------



## Dodger (Mar 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I'd love to know who is deemed in that category. Most of us who are supporting the No campaign are just loyalist. I have only ever classed myself as British and have many English, Scottish and Irish friends. I have never heard a valid argument for and Independant Scotland only a lot of anti British shouting from a noisy minority.

Again I ask what do those on hear who support the Yes campaign think may happen after a No vote.
		
Click to expand...

Before that maybe you might answer the question I asked of you and many others.

That is of course if you actually have an answer for it of course.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 31, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Before that maybe you might answer the question I asked of you and may others.

That is of course if you actually have an answer for it of course.
		
Click to expand...

I'll have one of what your drinking. It's been answered a few times, just read the thread.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 31, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Before that maybe you might answer the question I asked of you and many others.

That is of course if you actually have an answer for it of course.
		
Click to expand...

I answered


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I answered 

Click to expand...

We all have many times but as is the norm with the Yes delegate, if they don't like the answer they ignore it.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 31, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Ironically that is not always true as New Labour was re-elected twice on the strength of Scotland's votes when English votes alone would have given a different result.
		
Click to expand...

Apologies! Should have stated 'the present incumbents of Westminster' in there somewhere. I believe the populace of Scotland is vehemently anti Tory and moderately anti Westminster, while the SNP is distinctly more anti Westminster - or at least more pro self governing!

@Dodger It's definitely easier to argue the positives about the benefits of any change - and many of them are often not truly quantifiable either - at least from a cost perspective. It's actually quite difficult to argue the benefits of 'no change'. And this applies to anything, whether it be the other half's wardrobe, changes to a house, or a country's independence! In the case of independence, the cost of making and passing laws and the infrastructure to implement and apply them - including a vastly increased Civil Service - is one example of the sort of things that haven't been highlighted. The loss of a joint approach to Trade is another, pretty non-quantifiable, one. How much these things matter is a different question, but there are plenty of things that the BT folk should be broadcasting.


----------



## Dodger (Mar 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I'll have one of what your drinking. It's been answered a few times, just read the thread.
		
Click to expand...

I have not read the whole thread and certainly not doing 75 pages back so give me yours in a summary please.

Thanks.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 31, 2014)

The summary was in 1499 but the sentiment is similar to Phils a couple above that. Hope that helps now perhaps you will answer the question raised in that post.


----------



## Old Skier (Mar 31, 2014)

"Barrhead Travel is yet another example of an employer in Scotland saying that being part of the UK is better for their business. Having access to a single UK market of sixty three million people, rather than five million, means Scotland's firms have more opportunities to thrive and employ more people. Where is the sense in putting a barrier between Scottish businesses and their customers elsewhere in the UK?


"Businesses still aren't being told what would replace the Pound and how we would get back into the EU or on what terms. Asking Scotland's employers to hope that it will be alright on the night isn't good enough.


"Being part of the UK means we can have the best of both worlds - a strong Scottish Parliament, with the guarantee of more powers, backed up by the strength, security and stability of being part of the larger UK. Independence puts that at risk.


"Barrhead Travel is a real Scottish success story to be proud of. The nationalists' response to the company saying they want to stay part of the UK is a new low. This is the worst type of negative politics from Yes campaigners."


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Mar 31, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So it was the 30 odd Scottish votes that won the day and not the 250 odd English ones. Get real.
		
Click to expand...

I would suggest that you look at the results of the 2001 & 2005 General Elections but then I realise that you don't do facts, only prejudices.


----------



## Dodger (Mar 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			The summary was in 1499 but the sentiment is similar to Phils a couple above that. Hope that helps now perhaps you will answer the question raised in that post.
		
Click to expand...


Nice cop out. Thanks.:thup:


----------



## Val (Mar 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			"Barrhead Travel is yet another example of an employer in Scotland saying that being part of the UK is better for their business. Having access to a single UK market of sixty three million people, rather than five million, means Scotland's firms have more opportunities to thrive and employ more people. Where is the sense in putting a barrier between Scottish businesses and their customers elsewhere in the UK?


"Businesses still aren't being told what would replace the Pound and how we would get back into the EU or on what terms. Asking Scotland's employers to hope that it will be alright on the night isn't good enough.


"Being part of the UK means we can have the best of both worlds - a strong Scottish Parliament, with the guarantee of more powers, backed up by the strength, security and stability of being part of the larger UK. Independence puts that at risk.


"Barrhead Travel is a real Scottish success story to be proud of. The nationalists' response to the company saying they want to stay part of the UK is a new low. This is the worst type of negative politics from Yes campaigners."
		
Click to expand...

Now, I said weeks ago about major businesses showing hands in the NO camp, Barrhead are not what I would call a major business but a substantial enough business. There are plenty to follow soon enough.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 31, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			As someone who had to go skip across the wall to clear and sort out your rubbish, help bury your dead and crap myself whilst I fought your fires I am at a lose to understand why the noisey minority are so determined to drive a wedge between the Union. The only argument I hear is that you are all p*ssed of with Westminster, well as strange as it may seem, so are the rest off us.

Perhaps someone could tell me in all honesty what this is really all about and how will the nationalist and republicans react if, as seems likely there is a No vote.
		
Click to expand...

Unless you're of an age to have fought in WWI or WWII, I seriously doubt you've fought in any war in my name, whether it was Falklands,Iraq,Afghanistan.So whilst I commend your bravery and admire your desire to serve queen and country, please don't think you had an obligation to fight any of those wars,legal or not, in my name.If you take offense to that, so be it, but that's a fact and I know i'm not alone.

And you may well be pissed off with Westminster, you may well want to remove yourself from their tyranny, but you can't and we can.

And the answer is self determination, the ability to be accountable, to be represented correctly internationally, to be held accountable for decisions and choices we make that reflect our country and out citizens.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Unless you're of an age to have fought in WWI or WWII, I seriously doubt you've fought in any war in my name, whether it was *Falklands,Iraq,Afghanistan.*So whilst I commend your bravery and admire your desire to serve queen and country, please don't think you had an obligation to fight any of those wars,legal or not, in my name.If you take offense to that, so be it, but that's a fact and I know i'm not alone.

And you may well be pissed off with Westminster, you may well want to remove yourself from their tyranny, but you can't and we can.

And the answer is self determination, the ability to be accountable, to be represented correctly internationally, to be held accountable for decisions and choices we make that reflect our country and out citizens.
		
Click to expand...

They were all done in the name of the UK - whether you agree with them or not.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 31, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Now, I said weeks ago about major businesses showing hands in the NO camp, Barrhead are not what I would call a major business but a substantial enough business. There are plenty to follow soon enough.
		
Click to expand...

I know Bill Munro well, I know his thoughts and have debated this with him.I respect his decision to air his views...I'd never think about doing the same for my firm, but he's made his choice and he'll stand behind it.How it works out for him, I'm not sure, but I refuse to make any kind of commercial gain from this episode.Personally, I think he's made a big mistake and have told him so today...the nationalists are significantly more vocal and 'partisan' than the unionsists


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Mar 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			They were all done in the name of the UK - whether you agree with them or not.
		
Click to expand...

And in some cases, against the backdrop of huge public opposition, but I'll not comment on this again as it serves no purpose.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			And in some cases, against the backdrop of huge public opposition, but I'll not comment on this again as it serves no purpose.
		
Click to expand...


Always going to be public opposition regardless of the situation. 

But the guys were still doing their job as requested and under the banner of the UK forces,


----------



## Val (Mar 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I know Bill Munro well, I know his thoughts and have debated this with him.I respect his decision to air his views...I'd never think about doing the same for my firm, but he's made his choice and he'll stand behind it.How it works out for him, I'm not sure, but I refuse to make any kind of commercial gain from this episode.Personally, I think he's made a big mistake and have told him so today...the nationalists are significantly more vocal and 'partisan' than the unionsists
		
Click to expand...

The only firms who will show their hand are those who's businesses will not be affected by showing their hand, it will be interesting to see if firms like Aberdeen Assett Management who are now a well known respected proud Scottish business show their hands and the longer they take to do so the more likely they will be in the NO camp which I'm sure they will be.


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Unless you're of an age to have fought in WWI or WWII, I seriously doubt you've fought in any war in my name, whether it was Falklands,Iraq,Afghanistan.So whilst I commend your bravery and admire your desire to serve queen and country, please don't think you had an obligation to fight any of those wars,legal or not, in my name.If you take offense to that, so be it, but that's a fact and I know i'm not alone.
		
Click to expand...

What is your stance on the longest operational deployment by the British Army, attempting to prevent two communities of UK citizens from slaughtering each other?


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 31, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			What is your stance on the longest operational deployment by the British Army, attempting to prevent two communities of UK citizens from slaughtering each other?
		
Click to expand...

Mine is that, apart from the (admittedly huge) principle of not letting 'terrorists' win, they shouldn't have bothered! The stepped aside elsewhere often enough!


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 31, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Mine is that, apart from the (admittedly huge) principle of not letting 'terrorists' win, they shouldn't have bothered! The stepped aside elsewhere often enough!
		
Click to expand...

An example?


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 31, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Dodger has asked a very good question.
There is a level of arrogance [or ignorance perhaps, both of which we are well used to] in some of the anti Scotland postings.
I think that those who fall into that category should at least be brave enough to give him an honest answer.
		
Click to expand...

Doon, you are a victim of your own arrogance and blinded by prejudice.

Where are all these anti Scotland postings you mention?   I have only seen posts that counter the 'Yes' vote and challenge its validity and practicability!   I feel there is more of an anti English undertone going on by some.

Regarding Dodgers question: We dont need to defend anything as we are happy with the status quo.   Its not for the BT to make a case for something we want, we already have that, its up to the iScotland types to make their case for change and we will consider  and give opinions as we feel appropriate.

I hope that is an honest enough answer but in your case I doubt if any answer will be seen as worthy, unless it mirrors your opinion.


----------



## Foxholer (Mar 31, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			An example?
		
Click to expand...

Yugoslavia 1945 is the obvious one that I have knowledge of - through Dad being there!

Think there were some shady dealings (also known as Commercial Diplomacy) in Arabia, Africa, India at various times too


----------



## stevie_r (Mar 31, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Yugoslavia 1945 is the obvious one that I have knowledge of - through Dad being there!

Think there were some shady dealings (also known as Commercial Diplomacy) in Arabia, Africa, India at various times too
		
Click to expand...

You are aware that 1945 was a long time ago and operation Banner wasn't?  The obvious point that you have chosen to ignore is that Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 1, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			You are aware that 1945 was a long time ago and operation Banner wasn't?  The obvious point that you have chosen to ignore is that Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom.
		
Click to expand...

Simply answered your question. Nothing more nor less. Though 1969 *was* quite a while ago. I've no real idea, but would think most on here weren't born then!

Now, back to Scotland!


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Simply answered your question. Nothing more nor less. Though 1969 *was* quite a while ago. I've no real idea, but would think most on here weren't born then!

Now, back to Scotland!
		
Click to expand...

No you didn't, not really.  Your comment at #1518 was both disgusting and ridiculous.  I am fairly sure that had sectarian based slaughter been taking place where you lived/ live, then you wouldn't be taking the view that they should have been left to get on with it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 1, 2014)

I see this morning The Guardian have a piece about traffic in iScotland driving on the right,


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I see this morning The Guardian have a piece about traffic in iScotland driving on the right,
		
Click to expand...

mmmm, can't find my calendar, what's the date again?


----------



## StuartD (Apr 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I see this morning The Guardian have a piece about traffic in iScotland driving on the right,
		
Click to expand...

and todays date is?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I see this morning The Guardian have a piece about traffic in iScotland driving on the right,
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 1, 2014)

They show a snazzy type of roundabout where you enter driving on the left and exit driving on the right.
Impressive bit of engineering.


----------



## ger147 (Apr 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I see this morning The Guardian have a piece about traffic in iScotland driving on the right,
		
Click to expand...

The BBC website are saying Liverpool are top of the league!! Not falling for that one...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They show a snazzy type of roundabout where you enter driving on the left and exit driving on the right.
Impressive bit of engineering.
		
Click to expand...


:rofl:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 1, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			What is your stance on the longest operational deployment by the British Army, attempting to prevent two communities of UK citizens from slaughtering each other?
		
Click to expand...

If two communities did want to slaughter each other you may have a point, but from my experience, two communities are caught up in a horrific war played out by fanatics on both sides,acts of brutality from both terrorist organisations, along with acts of brutality from the British army and RUC too.all the while the majority of folk just want to lead a normal life surrounded by chaos.

So I've answered and I won't again, NI is improving every day/week/year as the communities win , and if you're trying to draw a comparison between the troubles and iScotland,please don't.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If two communities did want to slaughter each other you may have a point, but from my experience, two communities are caught up in a horrific war played out by fanatics on both sides,acts of brutality from both terrorist organisations, along with acts of brutality from the British army and RUC too.all the while the majority of folk just want to lead a normal life surrounded by chaos.

So I've answered and I won't again, NI is improving every day/week/year as the communities win , and if you're trying to draw a comparison between the troubles and iScotland,please don't.
		
Click to expand...

In your experience? When and for how long did you live in NI.  

You may wish to keep an eye on the news in order to be better informed, dissident Republican activity is massively on the rise, in the last year Army bomb disposal has been deployed to 392 separate incidents.  Incidents of cross-community intimidation and violence are all to frequent, rather strangely it doesn't make the national news that much


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 1, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			No you didn't, not really.  Your comment at #1518 was both disgusting and ridiculous.  I am fairly sure that had sectarian based slaughter been taking place where you lived/ live, then you wouldn't be taking the view that they should have been left to get on with it.
		
Click to expand...

You must have had a different question in mind to the one you wrote down then!

You are making completely wrong assumptions about what I think! Sectarian based slaughter is the disgusting and ridiculous thing imo. I should hope that's something we can agree on!

Btw. I believe Operation Banner was a success and the Military were magnificent, as they normally are - but with the odd catastrophic blip, also as normal! It was the politicians that were, and quite possibly still are, the real barriers to peace! Oh and the thugs and criminals working within both sects for their own benefit.

Fortunately, I come from a place where, in spite of a significant Scottish ancestry and 'forced' economic migration, there is considerably more tolerance of different views, so extreme sectarianism is rarely seen - in site of my Grandmother's presidency of her County Orange Society! 

And, to get back to the Scotland debate...it has a similar population and economy (also somewhat unbalanced, but to an Agricultural bias rather than a Financial Services one), its own currency and is Nuclear free. So there is no doubt in my mind that an independent Scotland would flourish - if those that can vote decide 'Yes'. The only barrier would be the transition, something that, to me, is the area where the No/BT advocates need to (continue to) attack them on, as it's the area most voters see as the most troublesome - even though, from a history/vision perspective it's only an instant!



Doon frae Troon said:



			They show a snazzy type of roundabout where you enter driving on the left and exit driving on the right.
Impressive bit of engineering.
		
Click to expand...

I tried that in Italy once - at the end of a long straight at the end of a long day! It was only the flashing lights of the oncoming driver that that made me realise roundabouts 'work' anti-clockwise in the rest of Europe!


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			and if you're trying to draw a comparison between the troubles and iScotland,please don't.
		
Click to expand...

I didn't and I am not, I'll refer you back to your post #1511, when you are capable of conducting a 'joined up' argument or debate then feel free to continue.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And, to get back to the Scotland debate...it has a similar population and economy (also somewhat unbalanced, but to an Agricultural bias rather than a Financial Services one), its own currency and is Nuclear free. So there is no doubt in my mind that an independent Scotland would flourish - if those that can vote decide 'Yes'. The only barrier would be the transition, something that, to me, is the area where the No/BT advocates need to (continue to) attack them on, as it's the area most voters see as the most troublesome - even though, from a history/vision perspective it's only an instant!
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, which country are you comparing to Scotland here?


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 1, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Sorry, which country are you comparing to Scotland here?
		
Click to expand...

Why does it matter? Are you so insular that you can't work it out?

And I forgot to include - it has an AA/AA+ rating from S&P

And it's not a case of comparison; just a demonstration that one that size does work.



stevie_r said:



			..... I'll refer you back to your post #1511, when you are capable of conducting a 'joined up' argument or debate then feel free to continue.
		
Click to expand...

Seems to me that was/is an entirely reasonable point of view!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Unless you're of an age to have fought in WWI or WWII, I seriously doubt you've fought in any war in my name, whether it was Falklands,Iraq,Afghanistan.So whilst I commend your bravery and admire your desire to serve queen and country, please don't think you had an obligation to fight any of those wars,legal or not, in my name.If you take offense to that, so be it, but that's a fact and I know i'm not alone.

And you may well be pissed off with Westminster, you may well want to remove yourself from their tyranny, but you can't and we can.

And the answer is self determination, the ability to be accountable, to be represented correctly internationally, to be held accountable for decisions and choices we make that reflect our country and out citizens.
		
Click to expand...




stevie_r said:



			I didn't and I am not, I'll refer you back to your post #1511, when you are capable of conducting a 'joined up' argument or debate then feel free to continue.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I follow, but it doesn't matter.I'm interested in Scottish independence, not the historical past of the British Army.And as much as my heart goes out to the silent majority in NI who have suffered at the hands of terrorist organisations,RUC or British army, this isn't the point of this thread, and if truth be told, if there was a separate thread about that topic, I doubt I'd get involved as there are too many service men on this board who for their own reasons would defend the reasons why there are troops in NI, and too many Irish folk on this board who would do the opposite.

So crack on and have the last word with me on this, I'll not reply to anything related to British soldiers in NI or NI in general.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Apr 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Fortunately, I come from a place where, in spite of a significant Scottish ancestry and 'forced' economic migration, there is considerably more tolerance of different views, so extreme sectarianism is rarely seen - in site of my Grandmother's presidency of her County Orange Society!
		
Click to expand...

But does that tolerance always extend to the indigenous peoples?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 1, 2014)

So Alistair Darling said yesterday, 

_The rest of the UK must have a say over a sterling zone with an independent Scotland_

I thought it had been completely 'ruled-out' by Osborne, Cameroon and the rest?


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 1, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			But does that tolerance always extend to the indigenous peoples?
		
Click to expand...

Certainly plenty of instances of intolerance - in our family even!

Apart from my oldest Uncle carrying on Granny's Orange Society bigotry, my youngest Uncle (of 13 kids, 11 of whom survived) was a racist of the highest order! Granny was a bit of a star though, pretty much single-handedly providing the Plunket Society (pre and post Natal care) with the role model and testimonials in her province! a classic forthright Scotswoman who never lost her accent!

I can remember calling in on him on our honeymoon, after he'd just returned from a quad bypass to hear him announce that as a 'darkie' had bought a place 3/4 of a mile down the road, it was time to sell up and move and he did - for a healthy profit of course! Gordon Strachan demeanour reminds me of Roy, but Strachan is a wimp in comparison!

Overall, Kiwis are fairly tolerant. There was some obvious negative reaction from vested interests when the Waitangi Tribunal was set up in 1975, but the 'fairness' of both the Treaty and the Tribunal tended to smooth acceptance. This is in contrast to the tactics of some of the original settlers!  I left in 1988, so little personal knowledge of what it's like in the areas of more densely Maori population now. Christchurch, and most of the South Island had few Maoris compared to the North.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Apr 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Overall, Kiwis are fairly tolerant. There was some obvious negative reaction from vested interests when the Waitangi Tribunal was set up in 1975, but the 'fairness' of both the Treaty and the Tribunal tended to smooth acceptance. This is in contrast to the tactics of some of the original settlers!  I left in 1988, so little personal knowledge of what it's like in the areas of more densely Maori population now. Christchurch, and most of the South Island had few Maoris compared to the North.
		
Click to expand...

Sounds and appears to be a happier situation than in your "noisy neighbour" country. 

The relative you mention could exist in any number of countries including UK. It should not be an excuse but it is often a generational thing, and I say that as a soon to be OAP.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 1, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Sounds and appears to be a happier situation than in your "noisy neighbour" country. 

The relative you mention could exist in any number of countries including UK. It should not be an excuse but it is often a generational thing, and I say that as a soon to be OAP.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed the Oz attitude to Aborigines has been pretty obscene - almost reflecting that of the first settlers in NZ. Remember the Midnight Oil song 'Beds are Burning'? The Lead Singer (Peter Garrett) eventually became a Aus Cabinet Minister - several times! However, while the Maori culture isn't vastly different from the 'Western' one, the Aboriginal one is hugely different - sort of equivalent to the African Bushman one.

Roy was distinctly outlandish. There are several stories of his behaviour I could bore anyone with! Flew Hurricanes in WWII - from age 16!


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Unless you're of an age to have fought in WWI or WWII, I seriously doubt you've fought in any war in my name, whether it was Falklands,Iraq,Afghanistan.So whilst I commend your bravery and admire your desire to serve queen and country, please don't think you had an obligation to fight any of those wars,legal or not, in my name.If you take offense to that, so be it, but that's a fact and I know i'm not .
		
Click to expand...

I have only mentioned firefighting, rubbish collection and burying your dead, where did all the rubbish about fighting wars in your name come from. Your selective reading gets better everyday. As to the tyranny of Westminister, I'm not sure what or where you got that from. You really are turning out to be a right little tinker arnt you.  Mind you the Yes campaign do seem to love making it up as they go along.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 1, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Nice cop out. Thanks.:thup:
		
Click to expand...

Not sure where the cope out is but as your too idle to check anything I can only assume your an idle student.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I know Bill Munro well, I know his thoughts and have debated this with him.I respect his decision to air his views...I'd never think about doing the same for my firm, but he's made his choice and he'll stand behind it.How it works out for him, I'm not sure, but I refuse to make any kind of commercial gain from this episode.Personally, I think he's made a big mistake and have told him so today...the nationalists are significantly more vocal and 'partisan' than the unionsists
		
Click to expand...

I presume this partisan bit is about the threats that have been made to his business and staff. True Republicans the Yes people by the sound of it.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 1, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I presume this partisan bit is about the threats that have been made to his business and staff. True Republicans the Yes people by the sound of it.
		
Click to expand...

I've not read any threats to his staff and the only threats to his business are ones threatening not to use his company again, but I'll happily stand corrected if you can show me otherwise?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 1, 2014)

Why are they threatening companies ?


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Apr 1, 2014)

Order Order

Come on guys, keep it on track, thread has nothing to do with Ireland

Thanks


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've not read any threats to his staff and the only threats to his business are ones threatening not to use his company again, but I'll happily stand corrected if you can show me otherwise?
		
Click to expand...

will try and find it, it was on FB and from the Better Together campaign so it could well have been all lies.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've not read any threats to his staff and the only threats to his business are ones threatening not to use his company again, but I'll happily stand corrected if you can show me otherwise?
		
Click to expand...

Apologise there was nothing about threats to staff now perhaps we can be grown up and you can do the same over a couple of your post where unfounded allegations have been made.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 1, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Apologise there was nothing about threats to staff now perhaps we can be grown up and you can do the same over a couple of your post where unfounded allegations have been made.
		
Click to expand...

OK, show me what you want me to apologise for and if I can't provide reasonable evidence I'll apologise.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			OK, show me what you want me to apologise for and if I can't provide reasonable evidence I'll apologise.
		
Click to expand...

PM sent


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			if I can't provide reasonable evidence I'll apologise.
		
Click to expand...

And we wait with baited breath


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 1, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			And we wait with baited breath
		
Click to expand...

You asked,via pm, for me to get back into the NI aspect of this thread,I gave you a two word reply that I felt made my position pretty clear then told you I didn't want to exchange any more pms.
We've been asked to not discuss that topic on this thread, I've previously said I don't want to discuss that topic, especially on this thread so I'll stick to my word.

You're obviously ex-military and have a point of view that you want to defend, which is fine, but I'll not be the catalyst for your soap boxing.So again, I'll not be discussing that topic on this thread, or any other thread.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			You're obviously ex-military and have a point of view that you want to defend, which is fine, but I'll not be the catalyst for your soap boxing.So again, I'll not be discussing that topic on this thread, or any other thread.
		
Click to expand...

I don't do soap box's and I asked you in a PM (hint is in the P) to prove the remarks you made which you are unable to do. It is unfortunate that you can make accusations without any proof and the mods here let you get away with it. But hey ho that seems to be the way of the mods here and I will accept it.


----------



## chris661 (Apr 1, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I don't do soap box's and I asked you in a PM (hint is in the P) to prove the remarks you made which you are unable to do. It is unfortunate that you can make accusations without any proof and the mods here let you get away with it. But hey ho that seems to be the way of the mods here and I will accept it.
		
Click to expand...

Get off your high horse mate. We are not here to police every post on every thread as to whether it can be verified.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 1, 2014)

Looks like iScotland may be able make a killing by selling cans of fresh air to the South of England


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 2, 2014)

chris661 said:



			Get off your high horse mate. We are not here to police every post on every thread as to whether it can be verified.
		
Click to expand...

:whoo:


----------



## MadAdey (Apr 2, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I don't do soap box's and I asked you in a PM (hint is in the P) to prove the remarks you made which you are unable to do. It is unfortunate that you can make accusations without any proof and the mods here let you get away with it. But hey ho that seems to be the way of the mods here and I will accept it.
		
Click to expand...


Have you not noticed that *Adi2Dassler* is just out to get reactions from people. Any other thread I see him pop up on he is trying to wind people up. Do not argue with him, just leave him to his own sad little world.


----------



## Dodger (Apr 2, 2014)

MadAdey said:



			Have you not noticed that *Adi2Dassler* is just out to get reactions from people. Any other thread I see him pop up on he is trying to wind people up. Do not argue with him, just leave him to his own sad little world.
		
Click to expand...

Irony overload.....


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 2, 2014)

MadAdey said:



			Have you not noticed that *Adi2Dassler* is just out to get reactions from people. Any other thread I see him pop up on he is trying to wind people up. Do not argue with him, just leave him to his own sad little world.
		
Click to expand...

Of course I try to get reactions out of people, it's a debate,isn't it?And maybe sometimes I do try to wind folk up, but are you telling me I'm alone on this board in doing that?Aye.Right.

Now lets see if you reply, or leave me to my own sad little world.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Of course I try to get reactions out of people, it's a debate,isn't it?And maybe sometimes I do try to wind folk up, but are you telling me I'm alone on this board in doing that?Aye.Right.

Now lets see if you reply, or leave me to my own sad little world.
		
Click to expand...

Trouble is your little wind ups are based on no right of reply


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 2, 2014)

As thread originator can we settle down please.

There has been some very good debate on this thread and I think both sides have learned a lot from some well informed posters.
I appreciate there is bound to be a bit of 'banter' but can we keep it civil and stay off areas which will only offend.

Thank you


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			As thread originator can we settle down please.

There has been some very good debate on this thread and I think both sides have learned a lot from some well informed posters.
I appreciate there is bound to be a bit of 'banter' but can we keep it civil and stay off areas which will only offend.

Thank you
		
Click to expand...

Fair enough it was just such a shame that it was you that stepped over the "just banter" line.  Endex on the subject then


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 2, 2014)

MadAdey said:



			Have you not noticed that *Adi2Dassler* is just out to get reactions from people. Any other thread I see him pop up on he is trying to wind people up. Do not argue with him, just leave him to his own sad little world.
		
Click to expand...

Much as I disagree with Adi's views on independence I find his contributions on the subject to be generally informative and engaging; more so that what our politicians are serving up....

Keep it up :thup:

Misguided though you are!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 2, 2014)

So there's been accusations of cybernatery on here and other places, some of it accurate,some of it nonsense.

But is there an opposite?Does BT use the internet to spread lies?Well, yes they do, and not only that, MP's use the internet to spread lies.I'm no fan of the wingsoverscotland chavvie, I think he's part of the problem surrounding this whole process, but credit where it's due, this is decent...

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-smear-wars/


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 2, 2014)

Does this mean that we now have to start publishing links to the Better Together campaign.  As you yourself stated above, although you are tending just to blame MPs for this, some is accurate and some is not.  I presume that the bits the Yes campaign are accurate (just like your posts)and the rest is damn lies.

Ah well, off to the golf course as the sun is shinning again in the West Country.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 2, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Does this mean that we now have to start publishing links to the Better Together campaign.  As you yourself stated above, although you are tending just to blame MPs for this, some is accurate and some is not.  I presume that the bits the Yes campaign are accurate (just like your posts)and the rest is damn lies.

Ah well, off to the golf course as the sun is shinning again in the West Country.
		
Click to expand...

You don't _have_ to do anything, but I expect if you stick within what the admins deem acceptable you're free to post anything you think is relevant.

enjoy your golf.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 2, 2014)

Adi20 has contributed a great deal to this debate.
Am I right in recalling that he will not vote Yes.

I'm still fence sitting but my English wife is firmly in the Yes camp.
[Even after a panel member of the Yes campaign said in front of her that 'most Southern English women are stuck up'.

His group has since apologised for this error.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 2, 2014)

This might be the most sensible, balanced blog I've read on the whole process...
http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/5411


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This might be the most sensible, balanced blog I've read on the whole process...
http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/5411

Click to expand...

Thank you very much for your comments on my blog.

Actually, it's not my blog, but is absolutely what I would write if it were!

And while I never quite agreed with his views on The House of Lords (who, imo, don't so much govern as moderate the Government), that Tony Benn quote is entirely appropriate to Scotland!



Doon frae Troon said:



			...my English wife is firmly in the Yes camp.
[Even after a panel member of the Yes campaign said in front of her that 'most Southern English women are stuck up'.

His group has since apologised for this error.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure they needed to apologise! In his world, he was quite possibly right! 

But "'Most' Scotswomen are scary" might not be all that far wrong either!


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This might be the most sensible, balanced blog I've read on the whole process...
http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/5411

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I'd say its balanced but I would say that it is the most politically sensible thing I've seen on the subject. There isn't a breath of what's in it for me but there is a whole lot of what's good for my country now and in the future. Crikey! I'd vote yes if the politicians wanted independance based on those thoughts rather than the confrontational back biting and mud slinging.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This might be the most sensible, balanced blog I've read on the whole process...
http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/5411

Click to expand...

A very good spot adi20, I hope all on here will take the time to read it.

The Tony Benn question sums everything up for me.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 3, 2014)

Good thoughts in that blog.  The sign-off...

_But if the Unionists can put forward a more positive proposal Iâ€™m genuinely open to changing my mind._

...currently seems to present a difficulty for BT.  I hope that situation changes soon.


----------



## CMAC (Apr 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This might be the most sensible, balanced blog I've read on the whole process...
http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/5411

Click to expand...

I'm shocked- I cannot believe what I read in this blog- it's utterly utterly disgusting and an anathema to me.


How on Earth anyone can post that kind of mental imagary and expect me to take them seriously is beyond me- The Krankies are swingers...........I think a wee bit of sick just came up.





_/I'll read the rest once I've had a wee lie down_


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 3, 2014)

Good read but the blogger proved his own point. The Yes campaigners are all about we don't like England without any consideration for RUK. Arguments should be based on how things will be better/worse based on the UK as a whole and not all about what happens over a 5 year period in Westminster. With over half the population not involving themselves in voting it's not surprising we get the politicians we have.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 3, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Good read but the blogger proved his own point. The Yes campaigners are all about we don't like England without any consideration for RUK. Arguments should be based on how things will be better/worse based on the UK as a whole and not all about what happens over a 5 year period in Westminster. With over half the population not involving themselves in voting it's not surprising we get the politicians we have.

Click to expand...

We certainly are not

Not for everyone

do you mean on a Uk level or the referendum?I think the % of voters casting their votes will break records


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 3, 2014)

Unfortunately that is the impression you are giving

Scotland should vote on if they are better off leaving UK - not based on leaving England

I meant the apathy of voting in the whole of the UK.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 3, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Unfortunately that is the impression you are giving

Scotland should vote on if they are better off leaving UK - not based on leaving England

I meant the apathy of voting in the whole of the UK.
		
Click to expand...

you've cannae base your impression on the entire Yes campaign on my ramblings on a golf internet forum,surely?!

and Scotland shouldn't vote on whether we're better off or not in or out of the union,Scotland should vote on whether it wants to be an independent country taking responsibility for itself, both nationally and internationally,whether we're prepared to make choices and stand by them and be accountable to the electorate and our fellow countries.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			and Scotland shouldn't vote on whether we're better off or not in or out of the union,Scotland should vote on whether it wants to be an independent country taking responsibility for itself, both nationally and internationally,whether we're prepared to make choices and stand by them and be accountable to the electorate and our fellow countries.
		
Click to expand...

Just occasionally you shock me by being sensible... hate to say it but that's 3 times I've agreed with you in this thread. Keep up the good work dear boy!


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			you've cannae base your impression on the entire Yes campaign on my ramblings on a golf internet forum,surely?!

and Scotland shouldn't vote on whether we're better off or not in or out of the union,Scotland should vote on whether it wants to be an independent country taking responsibility for itself, both nationally and internationally,whether we're prepared to make choices and stand by them and be accountable to the electorate and our fellow countries.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry A2D didn't mean to give the impression that I meant you personally.

Independence country comment. That's the bit I still fail to understand. You stated you want to be an independent country taking your own responsibilities and then get upset when the nut jobs in Westminster say fine but you'll have to sort your own currency and all sorts of people get upset when someone suggests you may not be able to just walk into the EU.

IMHO that sounds like you want to be independent as long as you can have the safety net of some kind of Union but having the right to not stand by the or any unions decision.

got it


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 3, 2014)

Sorry, need to stop using you, change to the Yes campaign


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 3, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			You stated you want to be an independent country taking your own responsibilities and then get upset when the nut jobs in Westminster say fine but you'll have to sort your own currency and all sorts of people get upset when someone suggests you may not be able to just walk into the EU.
		
Click to expand...

This is important, it's essential that folk know that the white paper is not the template for iScotland, it's the proposed route The SNP would theoretically take iScotland down.Now I can argue all day the merits in what The SNP want as I can see the grains of promise held within, but if I had my way we'd have the following in iScotland

No currency union
No EU membership
No NATO membership

A new currency,EFTA membership and no NATO would do me fine and I know I'm not alone...The YES CAMPAIGN IS NOT THE SNP


----------



## patricks148 (Apr 3, 2014)

I think many in Scotland are unhappy with never getting a Gov they vote for and the Damage Maggie did lingers on, im not sure there would be quite as much interest in Ind if there was still a Lab gov, but maybe there would!
 where i live is quite Liberal, in fact the ginger rodents seat is here, but he won't be getting back in regardless. 

I think all the stuff coming from the gov is just fueling the fire after all without Scotlands voters the Con party will be in power for ever more.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 3, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			I think all the stuff coming from the gov is just fueling the fire after all without Scotlands voters the Con party will be in power for ever more.
		
Click to expand...

And it can be said, without Scottish votes Labour would never get in. That fact can only be changed by the electorate, it's not the fault of the respective parties.

Perhaps if we all targeted an Independent in the area to make sure they all lose their deposit (it's just a wish) perhaps they will all get the message.

For people to still be blaming Thatcher 20'yrs down the road shows what the problem is as a good number of voters weren't even alive during her time.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 3, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			I think many in Scotland are unhappy with never getting a Gov they vote for and the Damage Maggie did lingers on, im not sure there would be quite as much interest in Ind if there was still a Lab gov, but maybe there would!
 where i live is quite Liberal, in fact the ginger rodents seat is here, but he won't be getting back in regardless. 

I think all the stuff coming from the gov is just fueling the fire after all without Scotlands voters the Con party will be in power for ever more.
		
Click to expand...




Old Skier said:



			And it can be said, without Scottish votes Labour would never get in. That fact can only be changed by the electorate, it's not the fault of the respective parties.

Perhaps if we all targeted an Independent in the area to make sure they all lose their deposit (it's just a wish) perhaps they will all get the message.

For people to still be blaming Thatcher 20'yrs down the road shows what the problem is as a good number of voters weren't even alive during her time.
		
Click to expand...

I don't actually think, in the last 50 years, it makes any difference which way Scotland votes in GE, whether Labour or Conservative.And by that I mean the winning party would still have won without Scotland.GE's are decided in SE England normally, their voting pattern generally reflects the winning party.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So there's been accusations of cybernatery on here and other places, some of it accurate,some of it nonsense.

But is there an opposite?Does BT use the internet to spread lies?Well, yes they do, and not only that, MP's use the internet to spread lies.I'm no fan of the wingsoverscotland chavvie, I think he's part of the problem surrounding this whole process, but credit where it's due, this is decent...

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-smear-wars/

Click to expand...


And in the spirit of fairness,here's a reply from the jambo supporting unionist Labour MP...read the wings link before this one for easier understanding

http://ianmurraymp.wordpress.com/2014/04/02/lets-have-a-reasoned-debate-based-on-fact/

He's taken it tight on twitter,so fair play for him replying.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 3, 2014)

Confused.com. Is the MP suggesting that the blogger actual lives in Bath, if so why is he saying he will vote Yes.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 3, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Confused.com. Is the MP suggesting that the blogger actual lives in Bath, if so why is he saying he will vote Yes.
		
Click to expand...

He is! And yes he does!

Check this out. There's even a pic of him. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-army-online-poison-shames-Nationalists.html


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 3, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			He is! And yes he does!

Check this out. There's even a pic of him. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-army-online-poison-shames-Nationalists.html

Click to expand...


Oops !


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 3, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Confused.com. Is the MP suggesting that the blogger actual lives in Bath, if so why is he saying he will vote Yes.
		
Click to expand...

Yup.He's the lunatic fringe but highly effective.Think he raised over Â£100K last month for his cause.

He's Nicky Clarke/John Barrowman/Eddie Izzard etc on steroids.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Yup.He's the lunatic fringe but highly effective.
		
Click to expand...

Its a shame that along with lowering the voting age and his kind of support this is what iscot is coming down to.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 3, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Its a shame that along with lowering the voting age and his kind of support this is what iscot is coming down to.
		
Click to expand...

I have no problems with the 16 year olds being allowed to vote, for many voters it is their children's future that is highest on the agenda.
I have also never heard a word of protest about allowing 16 year olds the vote.
Not really sure what you are implying by saying that they are not capable of making a decision.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not really sure what you are implying by saying that they are not capable of making a decision.
		
Click to expand...

IMHO that some, not all teenagers might make a decision for the wrong reason but if that is a way to get more people voting in the end that will be a good thing.


----------



## Imurg (Apr 3, 2014)

Is anyone in Scotland fearful of a very close vote..?
And I mean close - 50.5 - 49.5 say...
Although a majority, it could be said that if the wind was blowing the other direction the vote could have gone the other way.
Could this lead to conflict between the 2 sides..?
Wouldn't it be more prudent to require a larger majority than just a majority to force through what is, after all, monumental change.?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 3, 2014)

I don't think 'the establishment' thought for one minute it would be close so casually agreed the 50% figure with Salmond.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 3, 2014)

Imurg said:



			Is anyone in Scotland fearful of a very close vote..?
And I mean close - 50.5 - 49.5 say...
Although a majority, it could be said that if the wind was blowing the other direction the vote could have gone the other way.
Could this lead to conflict between the 2 sides..?
Wouldn't it be more prudent to require a larger majority than just a majority to force through what is, after all, monumental change.?
		
Click to expand...

How would it be democratic (or fair) that a majority wish for one thing to happen, but it can't happen because a minority don't want it to!


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 3, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			How would it be democratic (or fair) that a majority wish for one thing to happen, but it can't happen because a minority don't want it to!
		
Click to expand...

Agree but Imurg has just bought the Elephant into the room.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 3, 2014)

Imurg said:



			Is anyone in Scotland fearful of a very close vote..?
And I mean close - 50.5 - 49.5 say...
Although a majority, it could be said that if the wind was blowing the other direction the vote could have gone the other way.
Could this lead to conflict between the 2 sides..?
Wouldn't it be more prudent to require a larger majority than just a majority to force through what is, after all, monumental change.?
		
Click to expand...

I'm sure you're aware of the outcome of the last referendum?The vote cast were in favour of independence, so in theory we should be indy since the late 70s.But some crafty Labour politician managed to attach a rule meaning 40%+ of the electorate had to vote to make it valid.Fair enough, I suppose, but it's the only time ever in the history of British voting such a rule has been used.No such worries this time, I predict 75%+ of the electorate will vote.

And it will be close, even coming down to a couple 100 votes.But majority rules and either side will have to suck it up.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 3, 2014)

A close vote could cause quite a few problems - especially if it's a hundred either vote 

Does that really show a clear mandate to move forward ?


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			A close vote could cause quite a few problems - especially if it's a hundred either vote 

Does that really show a clear mandate to move forward ?
		
Click to expand...

Those are the rules. Laid down and agreed.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			A close vote could cause quite a few problems - especially if it's a hundred either vote 

Does that really show a clear mandate to move forward ?
		
Click to expand...

Personally can't forsee issues, whether either side wins.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Personally can't forsee issues, whether either side wins.
		
Click to expand...

Didn't in Wales so here's hoping.


----------



## Val (Apr 3, 2014)

Imurg said:



			Is anyone in Scotland fearful of a very close vote..?
And I mean close - 50.5 - 49.5 say...
Although a majority, it could be said that if the wind was blowing the other direction the vote could have gone the other way.
Could this lead to conflict between the 2 sides..?
Wouldn't it be more prudent to require a larger majority than just a majority to force through what is, after all, monumental change.?
		
Click to expand...

It wont be as close, I said before that I reckoned it would be minimum 60% no.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			A close vote could cause quite a few problems - especially if it's a hundred either vote 

Does that really show a clear mandate to move forward ?
		
Click to expand...

How many points does a PL side get is they win 6-5 - with a goal in the last seconds! Especially when they have only had 40% Possession or other stats!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I have no problems with the 16 year olds being allowed to vote, for many voters it is their children's future that is highest on the agenda.
I have also never heard a word of protest about allowing 16 year olds the vote.
Not really sure what you are implying by saying that they are not capable of making a decision.
		
Click to expand...

I too have no problem with it but allowing them to vote in the referendum and not in other elections is a tad cynical and smacks of gerrymandering. Seems to have backfired though as it appears the majority of these new voters are against independence.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It wont be as close, I said before that I reckoned it would be minimum 60% no.
		
Click to expand...

As I've said before, that would require every single undecided voting No, plus some current yes voters.That aint gonna happen.



FairwayDodger said:



			I too have no problem with it but allowing them to vote in the referendum and not in other elections is a tad cynical and smacks of gerrymandering. Seems to have backfired though as it appears the majority of these new voters are against independence.
		
Click to expand...

But if Yes wins 16 will become th enew voting age in any election, plus its being looked at by westminster now too.Yet again,Holyrood leads the way.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			As I've said before, that would require every single undecided voting No, plus some current yes voters.That aint gonna happen.



But if Yes wins 16 will become th enew voting age in any election, plus its being looked at by westminster now too.Yet again,Holyrood leads the way.
		
Click to expand...

Again - you don't know what will happen as not one single vote has been cast 

So far there are no yes votes or no votes.


----------



## StuartD (Apr 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			As I've said before, that would require every single undecided voting No, plus some current yes voters.That aint gonna happen.
		
Click to expand...

 Based on a sample polls. This would only be fact if the samples taken reflect the view of the country as a whole. If polls were fact Kinnock would have been PM.

I still think that a YES is a braver vote and some might back away nearer the time.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 4, 2014)

StuartD said:



			Based on a sample polls. This would only be fact if the samples taken reflect the view of the country as a whole. If polls were fact Kinnock would have been PM.

I still think that a YES is a braver vote and some might back away nearer the time.
		
Click to expand...

So if the polls are incorrect, as they were prior to the last national Scottish elections, I expect they'll be incorrect in the same way this time.I just think alot of people are miscalculating the mood of joe bloggs, as Carmichael,McLeish,Darling and Alexander have all hinted at in the last week.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 4, 2014)

Polls, who has ever done one on elections or politics! With all this polls going on through the years I would have thought someone might have asked me at least once. Now would I be tempted to give a complete opposite answer to the way I might vote. Probably.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			But some crafty Labour politician managed to attach a rule meaning 40%+ of the electorate had to vote to make it valid.
		
Click to expand...

Was it not that 40% of the total electorate had to vote YES - and so abstentions counted as NO - and even deceased who were still on the electoral register counted as NO.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 4, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Was it not that 40% of the total electorate had to vote YES - and so abstentions counted as NO - and even deceased who were still on the electoral register counted as NO.
		
Click to expand...

Apologies, aye.An errant yes does change that sentence quite alot.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 4, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Polls, who has ever done one on elections or politics! With all this polls going on through the years I would have thought someone might have asked me at least once. Now would I be tempted to give a complete opposite answer to the way I might vote. Probably.
		
Click to expand...


Not forgetting the nice wee polite folk who say 'of course I'm voting for you' to everyone.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 4, 2014)

I appreciate it's anecdotal and we all move in different spheres etc but I honestly know only a handful of people planning to vote "yes" and vastly more saying they're "no". I was out last night with four friends I hadn't previously discussed it with - all are voting "no".

Based purely on my own circle, therefore, it's going to be a landslide for "no". Obviously it's not that simple but that's why I just can't recognise claims that "yes" will win, or even that it'll be close.


----------



## Val (Apr 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So if the polls are incorrect, as they were prior to the last national Scottish elections, I expect they'll be incorrect in the same way this time.I just think alot of people are miscalculating the mood of joe bloggs, as Carmichael,McLeish,Darling and Alexander have all hinted at in the last week.
		
Click to expand...

I think you are over miscalculating the YES campaign success personally.


----------



## Val (Apr 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I appreciate it's anecdotal and we all move in different spheres etc but I honestly know only a handful of people planning to vote "yes" and vastly more saying they're "no". I was out last night with four friends I hadn't previously discussed it with - all are voting "no".

Based purely on my own circle, therefore, it's going to be a landslide for "no". Obviously it's not that simple but that's why I just can't recognise claims that "yes" will win, or even that it'll be close.
		
Click to expand...

I said the same thing weeks ago, I know very few people who will vote yes, Adi2D says he knows a few who will vote NO.

I really can't see it anything other than a no.

As for opinion votes, if you take a small percentage of people and ask them a question you cannot make representation of that be the thought of the overall total, that's why these polls need to be taken with a pinch of salt.

No official has asked my opinion


----------



## Val (Apr 4, 2014)

Can I ask has anyone noticed the bullying tactics of the YES campaign after Barrhead travel showed their hand last week? Talk of boycotts etc.

No wonder other major businesses are holding off


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Can I ask has anyone noticed the bullying tactics of the YES campaign after Barrhead travel showed their hand last week? Talk of boycotts etc.

No wonder other major businesses are holding off
		
Click to expand...

As I said previously, I know Munro reasonably well given the trade and I'd never dream of doing what he did with my (smaller) firm.And I'd not use the language he used for sure, which is where the issue lies for nats.
And folk have the right to boycott any company for any reason, the beauty of free market economy.


----------



## Val (Apr 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			As I said previously, I know Munro reasonably well given the trade and I'd never dream of doing what he did with my (smaller) firm.And I'd not use the language he used for sure, which is where the issue lies for nats.
And folk have the right to boycott any company for any reason, the beauty of free market economy.
		
Click to expand...

Your last sentence is correct granted however does the language Munro used justify the bullying tactic of boycott?  It's a shocking tactic to use


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 4, 2014)

Dreadfully sad news about the untimely death of Margo Macdonald. A fierce nationalist who fought many battles with compassion and vigour.Scotland just became that wee bit less enlightened today.And a Hibby to boot, some curse!Another nationalist supporting Hibby leaving us not seeing either of the holy grails achieved.

I'll raise my glass tonight, RIP Margo.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 4, 2014)

Very sad, history will be kind to her I think.
Bonny fighter to the end.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 4, 2014)

The right to die lady ?


----------



## CMAC (Apr 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I said the same thing weeks ago, I know very few people who will vote yes, Adi2D says he knows a few who will vote NO.

I really can't see it anything other than a no.

As for opinion votes, if you take a small percentage of people and ask them a question you cannot make representation of that be the thought of the overall total, that's why these polls need to be taken with a pinch of salt.

*No official has asked my opinion*

Click to expand...

nor mine, nor anyone I know, nor any family member I know, nor any work colleague nor anyone in their family (we all checked).

I can see a massive NO! not close, won't touch the sides as the saying goes :smirk:

Fully agree with your sentiment on these polls


----------



## williamalex1 (Apr 4, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The right to die lady ?
		
Click to expand...

Phil, it's the only thing that we all HAVE to do, like it or not.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 4, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Phil, it's the only thing that we all HAVE to do, like it or not.
		
Click to expand...

I agree - I understand she was campaigned for people with terminal illnesses be allowed to take their lives.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 4, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I agree - I understand she was campaigned for people with terminal illnesses be allowed to take their lives.
		
Click to expand...

She did indeed.She fought with dignity for her right to choose.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			She did indeed.She fought with dignity for her right to choose.
		
Click to expand...


I have no doubt - they all appear too


----------



## ger147 (Apr 4, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The right to die lady ?
		
Click to expand...

She was SO much more than that. One of very few politicians who was more than happy to sacrifice any political ambitions to stay true to her beliefs and principles.

RIP Margo


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 4, 2014)

ger147 said:



			She was SO much more than that. One of very few politicians who was more than happy to sacrifice any political ambitions to stay true to her beliefs and principles.

RIP Margo
		
Click to expand...

Wedgwood Ben was another.


----------



## Iaing (Apr 5, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I appreciate it's anecdotal and we all move in different spheres etc but I honestly know only a handful of people planning to vote "yes" and vastly more saying they're "no". I was out last night with four friends I hadn't previously discussed it with - all are voting "no".

Based purely on my own circle, therefore, it's going to be a landslide for "no". Obviously it's not that simple but that's why I just can't recognise claims that "yes" will win, or even that it'll be close.
		
Click to expand...

In general conversation at my work (100 employees), it seems like a 75 to 25 percent majority towards voting YES. But we do push the Scottishness of our business.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 5, 2014)

Just heard news - ah Margo &#128549;

As a first time voter in 1976 Margo was such a charismatic figure and important figure for me - such a loss to Scottish poitics and Scotland


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 5, 2014)

A blog to back up my theory on a Yes victory

http://auldacquaintance.wordpress.com/


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Apr 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A blog to back up my theory on a Yes victory

http://auldacquaintance.wordpress.com/

Click to expand...

Very selective in his theories and rather naive.

Obviously supporters of the BT campaign are less likely to attend "town hall" meetings, why should they? They are not campaigning for change.

That does not, however, mean that they will not turn out to vote.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A blog to back up my theory on a Yes victory

http://auldacquaintance.wordpress.com/

Click to expand...

Idiotic assertion = stupid 'explanation'.

Poll samples are chosen to reflect the target population!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 5, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Very selective in his theories and rather naive.

Obviously supporters of the BT campaign are less likely to attend "town hall" meetings, why should they? They are not campaigning for change.

That does not, however, mean that they will not turn out to vote.
		
Click to expand...

So the BT propaganda on twitter etc showing "town hall" meetings etc is a mirage?



Foxholer said:



			Idiotic assertion = stupid 'explanation'.

Poll samples are chosen to reflect the target population!
		
Click to expand...

OK


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 5, 2014)

Excellent 'parody' of 500 Miles though!

http://auldacquaintance.wordpress.com/2014/02/28/400-miles/

Something new for Hibbies to practice in the Four in Hand!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 5, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Excellent 'parody' of 500 Miles though!

http://auldacquaintance.wordpress.com/2014/02/28/400-miles/

Something new for Hibbies to practice in the Four in Hand!
		
Click to expand...

The IV, if you please.Kano made the worlds dumbest decision to remove all the memorabilia and turn the front room into some sort of fashion bar.Laddie is as daft as he looks.

Robbies/Tamsons/Iona the places you'll find the right minded Hibby pre/post match


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The IV, if you please.Kano made the worlds dumbest decision to remove all the memorabilia and turn the front room into some sort of fashion bar.Laddie is as daft as he looks.

Robbies/Tamsons/Iona the places you'll find the right minded Hibby pre/post match
		
Click to expand...

Oops! Dumb decision indeed! Though probably still packed on match days!

I'm definitely out of date. My favourite Italian nearby is no longer Tinelli Ristorante either!


----------



## Val (Apr 5, 2014)

Iaing said:



			In general conversation at my work (100 employees), it seems like a 75 to 25 percent majority towards voting YES. *But we do push the Scottishness of our business.*

Click to expand...

As do we, however we are a higher percentage but in the NO camp.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Apr 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So the BT propaganda on twitter etc showing "town hall" meetings etc is a mirage?
		
Click to expand...

No of course not but, as I said, those who are happy with the status quo are less likely to attend public meetings than those who seek change.

It is the same at General Elections but still many people turn out and vote despite not being politically connected otherwise.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 5, 2014)

I'll be voting no and not attending any meetings!

The only opinion poll that matters is on 18th September, then we'll know!

:thup:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 5, 2014)

Adi will be a happy Hibee tonight.
Just make sure your team don't join the Jambos and Gers in the 'Championship' [Formally known as Scottish Div 2] next year.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Adi will be a happy Hibee tonight.
Just make sure your team don't join the Jambos and Gers in the 'Championship' [Formally known as Scottish Div 2] next year.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not tbh.I have many jambo pals, and while banter is good, the lack of the derby (even if we do lose everysingleone) is a sore one, financially and emotionally.We'll not get relegated, so next year will be even grimmer than normal.


----------



## Dodger (Apr 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not tbh.I have many jambo pals, and while banter is good, the lack of the derby (even if we do lose everysingleone) is a sore one, financially and emotionally.We'll not get relegated, so next year will be even grimmer than normal.
		
Click to expand...

Amazing to think that our Capital City has 2 such rank rotten teams, it really is. 

Is there a Capital City in Europe with teams so bad?


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 5, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Amazing to think that our Capital City has 2 such rank rotten teams, it really is. 

Is there a Capital City in Europe with teams so bad?
		
Click to expand...

The population has a lot to do with it. In many areas, Edinburgh is distinctly the #2 to Glasgow - purely because of population. 

Makes Manchester's feat, with about the same population as Edinburgh and half that of the likes Liverpool and Birmingham, all the more remarkable.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 5, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Amazing to think that our Capital City has 2 such rank rotten teams, it really is. 

Is there a Capital City in Europe with teams so bad?
		
Click to expand...

Since you ask.......
Dublin, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Monaco, Vaduz, Tallin, San Marino, Riga, Vilnus, Nicosia, Chisinu and Nuuk.

See were are quite good really!


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Since you ask.......
Dublin, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Monaco, Vaduz, Tallin, San Marino, Riga, Vilnus, Nicosia, Chisinu and Nuuk.

See were are quite good really!
		
Click to expand...

You forgot Berne! And Lichtenstein and Torshavn.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 5, 2014)

r



Foxholer said:



			The population has a lot to do with it. In many areas, Edinburgh is distinctly the #2 to Glasgow - purely because of population. 

Makes Manchester's feat, with about the same population as Edinburgh and half that of the likes Liverpool and Birmingham, all the more remarkable.
		
Click to expand...

If you're gonna use Man Utd/City you have to use Greater Manchester considering one of them doesn't even play in Manchester!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Since you ask.......
Dublin, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Monaco, Vaduz, Tallin, San Marino, Riga, Vilnus, Nicosia, Chisinu and Nuuk.

See were are quite good really!
		
Click to expand...

And name the second team in Paris - in fact without looking name any Paris team other than PSG


----------



## Dodger (Apr 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Since you ask.......
Dublin, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Monaco, Vaduz, Tallin, San Marino, Riga, Vilnus, Nicosia, Chisinu and Nuuk.

See were are quite good really!
		
Click to expand...

Struggling badly there. 

I would place at least 5 of them as capable of shafting Auld Reekie's embarrassing pair.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 5, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Struggling badly there. 

I would place at least 5 of them as capable of shafting Auld Reekie's embarrassing pair.
		
Click to expand...

Edinburgh Jambees anyone


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 5, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Struggling badly there. 

I would place at least 5 of them as capable of shafting Auld Reekie's embarrassing pair.
		
Click to expand...

Two teams remember.

Forgot Vatican City as well, I wonder if they have a 'holy goalie'.


----------



## Dodger (Apr 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Two teams remember.

Forgot Vatican City as well, I wonder if they have a 'holy goalie'.
		
Click to expand...

Naw,he's at Southampton. I'm combining them.....


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			r



If you're gonna use Man Utd/City you have to use Greater Manchester considering one of them doesn't even play in Manchester!
		
Click to expand...

True enough. Hadn't realised the difference was so significant - in spite of working in Warrington for a time, a distinctly Blue supporting area and not greatly endowed with decent - and available for a nomad - golf courses - well, I didn't find them!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 6, 2014)

Another Sunday, another load of not so good for the unionists broadsheet headlines...note the different figs, one has removed don't knows,the other hasn't.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...ref-poll-yes-41-no-47-dont-know-13.1396775642
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/ScottishReferendum/article1396930.ece

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Our splash: The Currency Cover-up <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23scotpapers&amp;src=hash">#scotpapers</a> <a href="http://t.co/QLjVBwhNgN">pic.twitter.com/QLjVBwhNgN</a></p>&mdash; sunday herald (@newsundayherald) <a href="https://twitter.com/newsundayherald/statuses/452565980183408640">April 5, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 6, 2014)

So the No's are still winning then :thup:


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 6, 2014)

And we are not trusting or believing polls - or we are now!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So the No's are still winning then :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Yes, but as you can see moving in the wrong direction so no really.

Not that I would ever trust a poll by Scots to mean anything at all.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Yes, but as you can see moving in the wrong direction so no really.

Not that I would ever trust a poll by Scots to mean anything at all.
		
Click to expand...

But not really ?


----------



## StuartD (Apr 7, 2014)

Iaing said:



			In general conversation at my work (100 employees), it seems like a 75 to 25 percent majority towards voting YES. But we do push the Scottishness of our business.
		
Click to expand...

At my work (2000 employees) there is not one person i have spoken to will be voting yes. As we work on defence contracts I wouldn't expect it to be any other way tbh


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 7, 2014)

And so according to Darling on the Marr show - BT are going to stop being quite so negative and start accentuating the positives.  That'll be good - rather change of tack since to date I've heard repeatedly that BT don't have to state the benefits of a NO vote - it's up to the YES campaign to sell benefits.  Anyway - looking forward to hearing from BT what a NO vote will mean for the Scots electorate.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Looks like the blinking Darling didn't send the memo...

cataclysmic
forces of darkness
threaten stability

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...-would-be-cataclysmic-for-the-west.1396945351


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Looks like the blinking Darling didn't send the memo...

cataclysmic
forces of darkness
threaten stability

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...-would-be-cataclysmic-for-the-west.1396945351

Click to expand...

And what is your opinion of Lord Roberstons speech?


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

For me taking aside his bold use of language this is the important part, laugh and joke all you like about security but this part is very serious.




			He said Scottish Government plans to remove Trident nuclear submarines from their base on the Clyde in Scotland in the event of independence could make it "very difficult for Nato to accept them" as a member.

"Effectively, they wouldn't just be disarming an independent Scotland, they would effectively be disarming the remainder of the United Kingdom," Lord Robertson said

"I don't think that that would be viewed with great comfort or with any great satisfaction by those in the alliance who believe that Britain's nuclear deterrent is part and parcel of the West's security."
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 8, 2014)

Defence is one of those areas that a small country hopes the expenditure is a complete waste of money! Or at least a 'disguised grant' to boost the economy.

The re-location of rUK's nuclear weapons and iScotland's participation in Nato are separate issues imo.

Disappointing, but not unexpected, that so many appear to be deciding which way to vote on the basis of 'what's best for me now' rather than 'what's best for my/the children and theirs'. Understandable for those working in the Defense related industry though.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

In the year 2016 do you think Scotland will really need Trident and NATO.
They strike me as being 'yesterday's people'.

What country is going to attack Scotland?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			And what is your opinion of Lord Roberstons speech?
		
Click to expand...

It chimes with BT's strategy of project fear.It suggests that Scotland wouldn't be a responsible international partner.Robertson took on Hosie last year in a debate at Tayside uni (I think they both went there) How this guy rose thru the ranks to where he is now is a dreadful reflection on the state of polics in The UK (and I include Scotland in that)



Valentino said:



			For me taking aside his bold use of language this is the important part, laugh and joke all you like about security but this part is very serious.
		
Click to expand...

BT/unionists need to stick to one story when it comes to coulport/faslane.Just last week on this very thread the direct opposite of this was being touted as the BT stance, but now iScotland would be effectively disarming The UK...which is it?And the suggestion that a nukefree Scotland would not be welcomed into NATO is a joke and the other non-nuke members of NATO should be advised they're not welcome,leaving America and France.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In the year 2016 do you think Scotland will really need Trident and NATO.
They strike me as being 'yesterday's people'.

What country is going to attack Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

Think Russia were threatening it recently.....


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Think Russia were threatening it recently..... 

Click to expand...

They are our allies now that they have arrested Mad Vlad.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They are our allies now that they have arrested Mad Vlad.
		
Click to expand...

Bad news for your team..more delays.

Here's the debate I mentioned

[video=youtube;A5oHTBvidgc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5oHTBvidgc[/video]


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Salmond also in America, here's his speech..compare and contrast the different opinion held of Scotland from two Scottish statesmen

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...ed-self-interest-to-become-a-force.1396949240


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi, thanks for the Lord George v Hosie thread [why am I always wary of Labour politicians who take the ermine.]
Quite interesting stuff, Hosie was impressive IMO.
The students laughed at the girl who thought Scotland may get attacked by another country.
From 1.13 to 1.16 for those who wish a perspective on the Â£Â£Â£Â£.

Lord George implied Scotland does not have a culture or language.
[Never been to Celtic Connections then.]


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They are our allies now that they have arrested Mad Vlad.
		
Click to expand...

I thought you were talking about Putin! Even went to the BBC website 'cos I was sure that'd be big news!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I thought you were talking about Putin! Even went to the BBC website 'cos I was sure that'd be big news! 

Click to expand...

Keep up! It's Mr Romanov.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Keep up! It's Mr Romanov.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed! You should keep up though... they've let him go again! (My jambo colleague informs me)


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Not Lord Foulkes?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

So are there no more threats around the world anymore ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So are there no more threats around the world anymore ?
		
Click to expand...

There probably are, but I'll go out on a limb here and state none of them are from an independent Scotland.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There probably are, but I'll go out on a limb here and state none of them are from an independent Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

I believe it's more the threat from others around the world - terrorists etc 

Do Scotland really want to have unprotected borders or not be part of an alliance that shows strength in numbers.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I believe it's more the threat from others around the world - terrorists etc 

Do Scotland really want to have unprotected borders or not be part of an alliance that shows strength in numbers.
		
Click to expand...

What alliance do you mean?

UK
EU
NATO
UN
Commonwealth

I guess you mean UK, the very same UK that has removed jets/warships from our waters, so when Russia does plant a couple of their warships in Scottish waters, they have to send a ship up from Portsmouth to 'protect' us...but even better that warship only had one engine working as the other one was broken!Seriously, the ASC and CCS could protect us more effectively.

I wonder how Ireland/Norway/Iceland protect their borders....


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			What alliance do you mean?

UK
EU
NATO
UN
Commonwealth

I guess you mean UK, the very same UK that has removed jets/warships from our waters, so when Russia does plant a couple of their warships in Scottish waters, they have to send a ship up from Portsmouth to 'protect' us...but even better that warship only had one engine working as the other one was broken!Seriously, the ASC and CCS could protect us more effectively.

I wonder how Ireland/Norway/Iceland protect their borders....
		
Click to expand...

There are planes patrolling the North Sea and planes that have been scrambled from Leuchars to intercept Russian Bear A/C coming towards Scotland - I suppose without those UK planes the bears would have just soared right down across Scotland.

Are you now saying the UK military can't protect Scotland - what will you do with no military soon ? 

How many Russian or indeed any non NATO military ships have reached Scottish or indeed UK waters ? 

As each days goes by when I read your stuff I actually want you to go Independent now - remove yourself from every single alliance there is because I got a feeling you want to cherry pick which ones you want to join. 

You can leave NATO or Un or UK or EU or the lot and become a fully independent country. Then watch all the companies flood out of Scotland , all the military bases close and all the personel leave ,all the defence contracts leave , - wonder what you will be left with - Salmonds empty white promise paper full of nonsense. 

They were having discussion at Scotland's military bases and it appears the majority would like to stay in the UK armed forces , they would like to stay part of NATO.

I used the love the banter with the Scots and we used to work together really well in the military and in sport etc and I'm sad that my feelings about that union is changing because of people like you and your attitude towards the UK


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I believe it's more the threat from others around the world - terrorists etc 

Do Scotland really want to have unprotected borders or not be part of an alliance that shows strength in numbers.
		
Click to expand...

.........and involves us in illegal wars.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			.........and involves us in illegal wars.
		
Click to expand...

Which illegal war would that be that you were involved in


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			.........and involves us in illegal wars.
		
Click to expand...

Here we go again


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			There are planes patrolling the North Sea and planes that have been scrambled from Leuchars to intercept Russian Bear A/C coming towards Scotland - I suppose without those UK planes the bears would have just soared right down across Scotland.

Are you now saying the UK military can't protect Scotland - what will you do with no military soon ? 

How many Russian or indeed any non NATO military ships have reached Scottish or indeed UK waters ? 

As each days goes by when I read your stuff I actually want you to go Independent now - remove yourself from every single alliance there is because I got a feeling you want to cherry pick which ones you want to join. 

You can leave NATO or Un or UK or EU or the lot and become a fully independent country. Then watch all the companies flood out of Scotland , all the military bases close and all the personel leave ,all the defence contracts leave , - wonder what you will be left with - Salmonds empty white promise paper full of nonsense. 

They were having discussion at Scotland's military bases and it appears the majority would like to stay in the UK armed forces , they would like to stay part of NATO.

I used the love the banter with the Scots and we used to work together really well in the military and in sport etc and I'm sad that my feelings about that union is changing because of people like you and your attitude towards the UK
		
Click to expand...

Er Phil! Perhaps you should read this! http://www.fifetoday.co.uk/news/local-headlines/future-of-raf-leuchars-revealed-1-2821065

So no more scrambles from Leuchars!

Asking how many 'enemy' ships have entered Scottish waters is like asking how many Snakes did St Patrick banish!

If a large 'enemy' is going to encroach, there's sod-all iScotland could do about it, but it's rather likely that rUK would want to do something about it - and would act in their own interests anyway!  

Cherry picking is exactly what an Independent Scotland would/will be able to do! Since when is that disadvantageous? Seems to me, that's more of an advantage!

Now the business issue is much more something that the 'No' guys should push. They haven't been very successful so far. All businesses have to make contingency plans, so those are easily countered. It's the ones that make 'definite' statements that are important imo. Sky apparently won't change. Silicon Glen is possibly the area where most 'uncertainty' can be harvested by the 'No's.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Er Phil! Perhaps you should read this! http://www.fifetoday.co.uk/news/local-headlines/future-of-raf-leuchars-revealed-1-2821065

So no more scrambles from Leuchars!

Asking how many 'enemy' ships have entered Scottish waters is like asking how many Snakes did St Patrick banish!

If a large 'enemy' is going to encroach, there's sod-all iScotland could do about it, but it's rather likely that rUK would want to do something about it - and would act in their own interests anyway!  

Cherry picking is exactly what an Independent Scotland would/will be able to do! Since when is that disadvantageous? Seems to me, that's more of an advantage!

Now the business issue is much more something that the 'No' guys should push. They haven't been very successful so far. All businesses have to make contingency plans, so those are easily countered. It's the ones that make 'definite' statements that are important imo. Sky apparently won't change. Silicon Glen is possibly the area where most 'uncertainty' can be harvested by the 'No's.
		
Click to expand...


They will scramble from Lossiemouth instead as they are moving there.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			There are planes patrolling the North Sea and planes that have been scrambled from Leuchars to intercept Russian Bear A/C coming towards Scotland - I suppose without those UK planes the bears would have just soared right down across Scotland.

Are you now saying the UK military can't protect Scotland - what will you do with no military soon ? 

How many Russian or indeed any non NATO military ships have reached Scottish or indeed UK waters ? 

As each days goes by when I read your stuff I actually want you to go Independent now - remove yourself from every single alliance there is because I got a feeling you want to cherry pick which ones you want to join. 

You can leave NATO or Un or UK or EU or the lot and become a fully independent country. Then watch all the companies flood out of Scotland , all the military bases close and all the personel leave ,all the defence contracts leave , - wonder what you will be left with - Salmonds empty white promise paper full of nonsense. 

They were having discussion at Scotland's military bases and it appears the majority would like to stay in the UK armed forces , they would like to stay part of NATO.

I used the love the banter with the Scots and we used to work together really well in the military and in sport etc and I'm sad that my feelings about that union is changing because of people like you and your attitude towards the UK
		
Click to expand...

I get the feeling you've not been paying attention.


Scotland doesn't want to leave any alliance, firstly because,technically, we're not part of any alliance, except The commonwealth, but secondly because we're want to be active,responsible members of all of the alliances I mentioned previously.

And suggestions that companies will 'flood out of Scotland' may be true, it also may be total nonsense.But consider unionists like you made the very same threats prior to devolution, and guess what?Empty vessels do actually make the most noise.

And I hope that your wish for us to gain independence is achieved, but not for the reasons you have, but because of the reasons I have.They appear to be significantly different.

Also, there hasn't been any maritime patrol aircraft for the entire UK,let alone Scotland, since Nimrod was axed 4 years ago...the only way we found out the Russians were parked 12 miles off Scotland is when a couple of trawlermen from Peterhead reported it!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Unionist ?!

No not a unionist - just believe in strength together as one 

Have you even considered that it could all go horribly wrong after a yes vote ?

Have you considered the impact of people's livelihoods if a yes vote when the high possibility of job losses occur ? 

Or do you only consider your own reasons 

What happens if you get a yes vote and it rips Scotland apart ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Unionist ?!

No not a unionist - just believe in strength together as one 

Have you even considered that it could all go horribly wrong after a yes vote ?

Have you considered the impact of people's livelihoods if a yes vote when the high possibility of job losses occur ? 

Or do you only consider your own reasons 

What happens if you get a yes vote and it rips Scotland apart ?
		
Click to expand...

You want the union to continue, ergo you're a unionist.

The rest is just nonsense.My own reasons exclude job creation,Scotland becoming the West Bank and Martian invasions.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

It's nonsense or you don't want to think that a yes vote can be negative towards the country 

Is there a possibility that a yes vote could be bad for the country - yes or no 

What if that happens ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Is Mystic Meg still trading?

Nobody but Nobody can say with any certainty what will happen in their country in 5 years time.

As Hosie says what will happen to Sterling should Scotland shift their oil wealth to Euros.
It will collapse of course.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Is Mystic Meg still trading?

Nobody but Nobody can say with any certainty what will happen in their country in 5 years time.

As Hosie says what will happen to Sterling should Scotland shift their oil wealth to Euros.
It will collapse of course.
		
Click to expand...


So you say nobody can know for certain but then you state the sterling will collapse if Scotland shift their oil wealth ? 

Is the oil wealth currently UK's ?


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Is Mystic Meg still trading?

Nobody but Nobody can say with any certainty what will happen in their country in 5 years time.

As Hosie says what will happen to Sterling should Scotland shift their oil wealth to Euros.
It will collapse of course.
		
Click to expand...

Nonsense, sterlings a strength is not in oil


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Well I would say that there is a probability in 5 years time that Scotland will be in the Eurozone.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			They will scramble from Lossiemouth instead as they are moving there.
		
Click to expand...

Doesn't that destroy your earlier argument?

They will scramble from wherever the nearest/most appropriate base is! If rUK withdraw from Lossiemouth, they'll simply base the Squadrons at one of the other - most likely North East - bases.



Doon frae Troon said:



			As Hosie says what will happen to Sterling should Scotland shift their oil wealth to Euros.
It will collapse of course.
		
Click to expand...

This, however, is complete tosh!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It's nonsense or you don't want to think that a yes vote can be negative towards the country 

Is there a possibility that a yes vote could be bad for the country - yes or no 

What if that happens ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes.

Then we'll have to deal with the mistakes we make as a nation.simple.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well I would say that there is a probability in 5 years time that Scotland will be in the Eurozone.
		
Click to expand...

Is that highly dependent on if they are still part of the UK 

If the vote goes in the way of No then there is no "probability" of going to the Eurozone


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Yes.

Then we'll have to deal with the mistakes we make as a nation.simple.
		
Click to expand...


You make it sound so easy - all words at the end of the day, very flippant indeed. 

It's all bed of roses isn't it.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Doesn't that destroy your earlier argument?

They will scramble from wherever the nearest/most appropriate base is! If rUK withdraw from Lossiemouth, they'll simply base the Squadrons at one of the other - most likely North East - bases.



This, however, is complete tosh!
		
Click to expand...

And then they will scramble when coming near England/Wales/N.Ireland

Scotland will scramble their own jets for their own airspace within their own waters


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You make it sound so easy - all words at the end of the day, very flippant indeed. 

It's all bed of roses isn't it.
		
Click to expand...

Possibly,possibly not.I'm also aware that Scotland could improve on our current situation,I'm very much looking forward to finding out and contributing.

It's a wee bit of a shame you're becoming bitter about it, but can understand why.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Possibly,possibly not.I'm also aware that Scotland could improve on our current situation,I'm very much looking forward to finding out and contributing.

It's a wee bit of a shame you're becoming bitter about it, but can understand why.
		
Click to expand...

Not bitter - sad more like it. 

Sad to read that some people are so desperate to get away from the UK it appears it makes them blinkered and selfish.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Why would they be selfish?
I find that an astonishing comment even from you Phil.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 8, 2014)

Roll on September and we can put all this behind us. 

The politicians ought to be ashamed the way they are going on, both sides btw. Not much reasoned debate but plenty of "nonsense, blatantly untrue, bluff, bullying and bluster" when better together say anything remotely disagreeable to the splitters.

Hasn't the UK served us pretty well so far?  Sure, things maybe ain't perfect but we are much stronger as a united nation than seperate entities imo. We benefit from our pooled strengths and resources.

Hopefully we will see a resounding 'No' victory, and Salmond n Sturgeon are shut up for a while. But, I think it might be a wee bit closer which will, unfortunately, mean the snp will carry on using Westminster as an excuse for any failings in their governance.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Why would they be selfish?
I find that an astonishing comment even from you Phil.
		
Click to expand...


Because they are so determined to get a yes vote for their own reasons I believe they fail to see the impact on millions of others around the country.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Is Mystic Meg still trading?

Nobody but Nobody can say with any certainty what will happen in their country in 5 years time.

As Hosie says what will happen to Sterling should Scotland shift their oil wealth to Euros.
It will collapse of course.
		
Click to expand...

You really should avoid posting on financial and economic matters. 

Blether like the abov do no good to the pro-independence cause.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Because they are so determined to get a yes vote for their own reasons I believe they fail to see the impact on millions of others around the country.
		
Click to expand...

An impact you can see, bt the like of business for Scotland can't? I can't accept that.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Because they are so determined to get a yes vote for their own reasons I believe they fail to see the impact on millions of others around the country.
		
Click to expand...

Which country is that?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			You really should avoid posting on financial and economic matters. 

Blether like the abov do no good to the pro-independence cause.
		
Click to expand...

First to admit I am no financial expert. [Manage my own money well enough though!]

I have been told that few currencies would withstand a sudden 13% cut, especially so close to the banks collapse.

PS.... for your info, at the moment I am not Pro Independence.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Because they are so determined to get a yes vote for their own reasons I believe they fail to see the impact on millions of others around the country.
		
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight. The referendum is for the *Scots* and it's asking *them* whether *they* think *they* should be a separate country.

I think that's a fair enough reason for them to be, at least a little, selfish! Especially when the perception is of them being largely ignored by Westminster!


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			a sudden 13% cut,
		
Click to expand...

Where?

General tax revenues will reduce, yes, but so will expenditure. As for oil revenues these are likely to continue on a downward spiral and, in any event, those revenues may continue but to whom? Not yet clear.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			First to admit I am no financial expert. [Manage my own money well enough though!]

I have been told that few currencies would withstand a sudden 13% cut, especially so close to the banks collapse.

PS.... for your info, at the moment I am not Pro Independence.
		
Click to expand...

If a cheese feeds 10 mice a day and you cut off 10% of the cheese will all the mice be hungry?    

Not if you remove 10% of the mice as well.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Where?

General tax revenues will reduce, yes, but so will expenditure. As for oil revenues these are likely to continue on a downward spiral and, in any event, those revenues may continue but to whom? Not yet clear.
		
Click to expand...


I think he refers to the value of the Â£ if you remove Scottish people and Scottish money and Scottish oil from the value of sterling.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			If a cheese feeds 10 mice a day and you cut off 10% of the cheese will all the mice be hungry?    

Not if you remove 10% of the mice as well.
		
Click to expand...

That sounds a bit like something Eric Cantona would have said.

It the rUk currency moving to Chedder Cheese now.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			If a cheese feeds 10 mice a day and you cut off 10% of the cheese will all the mice be hungry?    

Not if you remove 10% of the mice as well.
		
Click to expand...

If you try to sell the cheese for the original value to next doors mouse, they'll tell you it's not worth as much anymore, devalue your cheese or we'll buy our cheese elsewhere


----------



## c1973 (Apr 8, 2014)

Thing is, when you cut the cheese, the slice never makes it to the mice......only the crumbs! 

Leave the cheese intact!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

And your cheese reserves will fall by 13%. and the wee sleekit cowerin timerous beasties will be in clover. [or perhaps edam]


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 8, 2014)

OMG. This analogy is getting ... er, Cheesy!

Unfortunately, the inspiration for the ditty came from 1 Scotsman's feeble and failed attempt at farming in which he destroyed at least 1 home!

There's a couple of other lines from that that are also relevant too!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Interesting fact in the debate is that England's second largest country of export goods is Scotland. [after the USA].
I find that weird that a country of only 5.3m residents feature so high.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			OMG. This analogy is getting ... er, Cheesy!

Unfortunately, the inspiration for the ditty came from 1 Scotsman's feeble and failed attempt at farming in which he destroyed at least 1 home!
		
Click to expand...

Was that Old MacDonald.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If you try to sell the cheese for the original value to next doors mouse, they'll tell you it's not worth as much anymore, devalue your cheese or we'll buy our cheese elsewhere
		
Click to expand...

This cheese is for eating.   The mice sell their bodies for experimentation to buy it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			OMG. This analogy is getting ... er, Cheesy!

Unfortunately, the inspiration for the ditty came from 1 Scotsman's feeble and failed attempt at farming in which he destroyed at least 1 home!

There's a couple of other lines from that that are also relevant too!
		
Click to expand...

I'm truly sorry man's dominion
Has broken natures social union.

Is that one.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I think he refers to the value of the Â£ if you remove Scottish people and Scottish money and Scottish oil from the value of sterling.
		
Click to expand...

....and all the expenditure in Scotland, including welfare.

Is it Scottish oil, where did the development capital originate. Diminishing asset in any case.

So now we are to believe that not only will there be a union on sterling but it will be on the terms dictated by the economic power-house Scotland.

Best to keep it simple; Get Real!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			....and all the expenditure in Scotland, including welfare.

Is it Scottish oil, where did the development capital originate. Diminishing asset in any case.

So now we are to believe that not only will there be a union on sterling but it will be on the terms dictated by the economic power-house Scotland.

Best to keep it simple; Get Real!
		
Click to expand...

Welfare mentioned in relation to Scottish independence...our own version of Godwins Law...you win the internet


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Barnett payment=all taxes (excluding oil revenues) raised in Scotland, according to Westminster, so that cancels that out.

We're told that there will be no currency union=no Scottish residents spending the Â£

This would also affect the balance of payments into/out of rUK using the Â£

If 10% of the folk thats used to use any currency are removed in one move, the value of that currency will be reviewed.

rUK has the Â£, devalued by x%, a higher per capita level of debt, a questionable credit rating, no nuclear weapons, probably removed from their permanent seat on the SC,no North Sea oil revenues, looking to leave the EU, veering towards UKIP.

No wonder you're desperate for us to vote No.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I'm truly sorry man's dominion
Has broken natures social union.

Is that one.
		
Click to expand...

Only slightly

Last verse seems appropriate to the Referendum

Still thou art blest, compar'd wi' me 
The present only toucheth thee: 
But, Och! I backward cast my e'e. 
On prospects drear! 
An' forward, tho' I canna see, 
I guess an' fear! 


And 2nd Last verse seems the biggest reason folk would vote 'No'!

But, Mousie, thou art no thy lane, 
In proving foresight may be vain; 
The best-laid schemes o' mice an 'men 
Gang aft agley, 
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain, 
For promis'd joy!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Barnett payment=all taxes (excluding oil revenues) raised in Scotland, according to Westminster, so that cancels that out.

We're told that there will be no currency union=no Scottish residents spending the Â£

This would also affect the balance of payments into/out of rUK using the Â£

If 10% of the folk thats used to use any currency are removed in one move, the value of that currency will be reviewed.

rUK has the Â£, devalued by x%, a higher per capita level of debt, a questionable credit rating, no nuclear weapons, probably removed from their permanent seat on the SC,no North Sea oil revenues, looking to leave the EU, veering towards UKIP.

No wonder you're desperate for us to vote No.
		
Click to expand...

What are the lottery number on Friday ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Barnett payment=all taxes (excluding oil revenues) raised in Scotland, according to Westminster, so that cancels that out.

We're told that there will be no currency union=no Scottish residents spending the Â£

This would also affect the balance of payments into/out of rUK using the Â£

If 10% of the folk thats used to use any currency are removed in one move, the value of that currency will be reviewed.

rUK has the Â£, devalued by x%, a higher per capita level of debt, a questionable credit rating, no nuclear weapons, probably removed from their permanent seat on the SC,no North Sea oil revenues, looking to leave the EU, veering towards UKIP.

No wonder you're desperate for us to vote No.
		
Click to expand...

Post of the year!!! well said.

I have noticed Mr Barnett has kept his heid well down now that actual facts show that we Scots actually manage our affairs better than Westminster.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			The best-laid schemes o' mice an 'men 
Gang aft agley, 
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain, 
For promis'd joy!
		
Click to expand...

Must confess I have dwelled on this a few times, sums up a lot of Scots at the moment.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler;1038718No wonder you're desperate for us to vote No.[/QUOTE said:
			
		


			Not any more! I really hope it is a Yes vote and that we can be rid of the Scots, you have been a drain on us for far too long and with an aging population that can only get worse. Don't suppose you would like to reclaim those two great bastions of the banking world and such great examples of Scottish financial prudence and management, RBS & HBoS.


No I didn't think so. 


Mind you I am wondering what has happened to the nuclear weapons in the scenario you paint. Are they to be seized by the Armed Forces that you and DfT don't want post independence.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Not any more! I really hope it is a Yes vote and that we can be rid of the Scots, you have been a drain on us for far too long and with an aging population that can only get worse. Don't suppose you would like to reclaim those two great bastions of the banking world and such great examples of Scottish financial prudence and management, RBS & HBoS.


No I didn't think so. 


Mind you I am wondering what has happened to the nuclear weapons in the scenario you paint. Are they to be seized by the Armed Forces that you and DfT don't want post independence.
		
Click to expand...

I have never said anything about not wanting armed forces, pretty sure Adi has not either.

Nuclear weapons yes, but not armed forces.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Barnett payment=all taxes (excluding oil revenues) raised in Scotland, according to Westminster, so that cancels that out.
.
		
Click to expand...

Barnett Formula;

"No account is made of the amounts raised by taxation in each of the home nations, nor the relevant fiscal need (based on factors such as sparsity of population, cost of travel, unemployment rates, and health) in each area. The Barnett formula never claimed to address these issues and was a basic calculation on the basis of proportions of the population..."

Nice to see you're still using facts to support your case...


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 8, 2014)

I don't suppose the yes school of fiscal study has come up with the figure regarding the amount of revenue that will be lost to the local Scottish economy with the withdrawal and closure of all the military bases.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Not any more! I really hope it is a Yes vote and that we can be rid of the Scots, you have been a drain on us for far too long and with an aging population that can only get worse.
		
Click to expand...

Careful now,the mask seems to be slipping occasionally on this thread recently,venturing towards xenophobia.if you could explain how us Scots have been a drain on the UK is appreciate it.

I agree we have an ageing population,spending money on caring for them instead of trains,nukes,wars and tax evasion sounds like a plan to me.


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Barnett payment=all taxes (excluding oil revenues) raised in Scotland, according to Westminster, so that cancels that out.

We're told that there will be no currency union=no Scottish residents spending the Â£

This would also affect the balance of payments into/out of rUK using the Â£

If 10% of the folk thats used to use any currency are removed in one move, the value of that currency will be reviewed.

rUK has the Â£, devalued by x%, a higher per capita level of debt, a questionable credit rating, no nuclear weapons, probably removed from their permanent seat on the SC,no North Sea oil revenues, looking to leave the EU, veering towards UKIP.

No wonder you're desperate for us to vote No.
		
Click to expand...

And if it was that transparent do you seriously think the uk treasury would be adamant there would be no currency union?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Barnett Formula;

"No account is made of the amounts raised by taxation in each of the home nations, nor the relevant fiscal need (based on factors such as sparsity of population, cost of travel, unemployment rates, and health) in each area. The Barnett formula never claimed to address these issues and was a basic calculation on the basis of proportions of the population..."

Nice to see you're still using facts to support your case...
		
Click to expand...


On my phone but I guess that's selective quoting,or coincidence that both figures are pretty close to each other.Will coke back to this tomorrow


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Not any more! I really hope it is a Yes vote and that we can be rid of the Scots, you have been a drain on us for far too long and with an aging population that can only get worse. Don't suppose you would like to reclaim those two great bastions of the banking world and such great examples of Scottish financial prudence and management, RBS & HBoS.
		
Click to expand...

What a bigoted response, shocking


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I don't suppose the yes school of fiscal study has come up with the figure regarding the amount of revenue that will be lost to the local Scottish economy with the withdrawal and closure of all the military bases.
		
Click to expand...


I believe they think they will create their own armed forces ( from the UK forces ) to keep the bases open 

Think the white paper suggests giving them two squadrons of typhoons plus all the personell and some Helicopters plus a battalion


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I don't suppose the yes school of fiscal study has come up with the figure regarding the amount of revenue that will be lost to the local Scottish economy with the withdrawal and closure of all the military bases.
		
Click to expand...

Closure by Westminster or by holyrood?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Careful now,the mask seems to be slipping occasionally on this thread recently,venturing towards xenophobia.if you could explain how us Scots have been a drain on the UK is appreciate it.

I agree we have an ageing population,spending money on caring for them instead of trains,nukes,wars and tax evasion sounds like a plan to me.
		
Click to expand...

Do you really believe your politicians will be any different to every other politicians ? 

The government won't earn any money by using tax money it look after people - trains etc will earn them money 

Think you might be living in a dream land or have far too much faith in politicians


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I believe they think they will create their own armed forces ( from the UK forces ) to keep the bases open 

Think the white paper suggests giving them two squadrons of typhoons plus all the personell and some Helicopters plus a battalion
		
Click to expand...

not sure that there are that many scots serving.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Closure by Westminster or by holyrood?
		
Click to expand...


Well if you leave the UK then the UK forces will leave your country and redeploy to other areas in the uk - those bases will then be left empty with no jobs for the thousands of people employed on them


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			What a bigoted response, shocking
		
Click to expand...

Fishing for a response and got one.


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Fishing for a response and got one.
		
Click to expand...

Not really a thread to fish on though, poor show.

Debate hard all you like but that was a low blow


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Closure by Westminster or by holyrood?
		
Click to expand...

Westminister I would think as I suspect that the penny pinchers in iscot like the ones in Germany would bill the RUK for the privilege of keeping their troops on foreign soil.


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			not sure that there are that many scots serving.
		
Click to expand...

It would surprise, just because the RRoS appears to be light don't underestimate the amount of Scottish people in the Corps as well as Navy and RAF


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Not really a thread to fish on though, poor show.

Debate hard all you like but that was a low blow
		
Click to expand...


It was low 

Some of the anti English has also sailed close to wind at times also or should i say anti south east England


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It would surprise, just because the RRoS appears to be light don't underestimate the amount of Scottish people in the Corps as well as Navy and RAF
		
Click to expand...


But how many of them are actually serving In Scotland ? 

Would they all want to leave their current posts to go back to Scotland ? Especially when some are working in sunnier climates around the world


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Not really a thread to fish on though, poor show.

Debate hard all you like but that was a low blow
		
Click to expand...

Or he could have been just reacting to the Anti British sentiments being expressed by the yes side.


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			But how many of them are actually serving In Scotland ? 

Would they all want to leave their current posts to go back to Scotland ? Especially when some are working in sunnier climates around the world
		
Click to expand...

The answer to your first question is not many but my response was to how many scots are serving, not how many serve in Scotland.

In terms of your second, I've said before that few with long service would be prepared to join an independent Scottish force


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Or he could have been just reacting to the Anti British sentiments being expressed by the yes side.
		
Click to expand...

Possibly, but need need to tar us all with the same brush


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			The answer to your first question is not many but my response was to how many scots are serving, not how many serve in Scotland.

In terms of your second, I've said before that few with long service would be prepared to join an independent Scottish force
		
Click to expand...

So they would possibly look to "hiring" UK forces ?


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It would surprise, just because the RRoS appears to be light don't underestimate the amount of Scottish people in the Corps as well as Navy and RAF
		
Click to expand...

If the state of the amount of Scots in Scotland's last armoured regiment is anything to go by I think 2 regiments might be pushing it and that's pulling everyone out of the corps so the boats and planes might have to go on the back burner unless the pay is good.


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So they would possibly look to "hiring" UK forces ?
		
Click to expand...

I've no idea if I'm honest, I suppose there would be a recruitment process for all rank and file top to bottom and whether uk citizens only could apply or not is anyone's guess


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			If the state of the amount of Scots in Scotland's last armoured regiment is anything to go by I think 2 regiments might be pushing it and that's pulling everyone out of the corps so the boats and planes might have to go on the back burner unless the pay is good.
		
Click to expand...

How many Scottish people do you think serve elsewhere in the forces? I seem to remember 4 RTR was almost 75% Scottish.

I genuinely think you'd be surprised.

That said, I'd be surprised if 50% would leave to join Salmonds army


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I've no idea if I'm honest, I suppose there would be a recruitment process for all rank and file top to bottom and whether uk citizens only could apply or not is anyone's guess
		
Click to expand...


These are the sort of finer details that will be crucial to  people but get glossed over currently


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Careful now,the mask seems to be slipping occasionally on this thread recently,venturing towards xenophobia.if you could explain how us Scots have been a drain on the UK is appreciate it.

I agree we have an ageing population,spending money on caring for them *instead of trains,nukes,wars and tax evasion *sounds like a plan to me.
		
Click to expand...

You talk as if Scotland took no part in the decision making for the above issues.   Seems to me there are a disproportionate number of Scots in Parliament and they have in many cases supported wars,Trains and Nukes.   Are you also suggesting that Scots have not evaded tax?  Are you suggesting somehow that these things were English policy only?


----------



## Val (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			These are the sort of finer details that will be crucial to  people but get glossed over currently
		
Click to expand...

Seems to be a minor point, can't see why it should be as this is a major issue


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Seems to be a minor point, can't see why it should be as this is a major issue
		
Click to expand...

Because thousands in the country rely on the military and defence etc for their livelihood plus the  local villages that rely on the bases for their business. 

It's just to highlight that there doesn't seem to be many finer points of anything covered by the people in. The yes campaign - lots of presumptions though


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			How many Scottish people do you think serve elsewhere in the forces? I seem to remember 4 RTR was almost 75% Scottish
		
Click to expand...

Your going back to 1993 now. I'm ex RTR and 1 had very few left in the later years and when they are down to just a Regiment in August I would bet on a small handful. Remember by 2018 there won't be enough left in the Army to fill Wembley so % are bound to go down.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I believe they think they will create their own armed forces ( from the UK forces ) to keep the bases open 

Think the white paper suggests giving them two squadrons of typhoons plus all the personell and some Helicopters plus a battalion
		
Click to expand...

You seem to have forgotten the Navy.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You seem to have forgotten the Navy.
		
Click to expand...

The only part of the Navy worth anything is nuclear. I thought you wanted nothing to do with that.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You seem to have forgotten the Navy.
		
Click to expand...


Do you believe the UK should just give you a part of the UK Forces or are you going to build your own from scratch or just hire the UK's


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			The only part of the Navy worth anything is nuclear. I thought you wanted nothing to do with that.
		
Click to expand...

I think iScotland will need fishery protection vessels more than nuclear subs.
They are also a hell of a lot cheaper. Massive savings gained by ditching and ancient out of date Trident systems.
Like the Scandinavian countries we have no need for large armed forces.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think iScotland will need fishery protection vessels more than nuclear subs.
They are also a hell of a lot cheaper. Massive savings gained by ditching and ancient out of date Trident systems.
Like the Scandinavian countries we have no need for large armed forces.
		
Click to expand...

So what about the people whose livelihood relies on those armed forces in Scotland ? What would you like them to do ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 8, 2014)

Were you not just saying we haven't got any, can't have it both ways.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Were you not just saying we haven't got any, can't have it both ways.
		
Click to expand...

You currently do that's the point.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 8, 2014)

Does the Rabbit know something we don't!

[video=youtube;hFWtz4hr65E]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFWtz4hr65E[/video]


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Apr 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			What a bigoted response, shocking
		
Click to expand...

My apologies to those of the Scots with a more balanced view. Yes the post was intended to provoke a response but also to show some on here how their continual carping and anti-English comments can come across to some of us.

Actually I am in favour of the Union and I do feel that we are all Better Together, I just sometimes tire of those who would have us believe that continuance of the current state is somehow designed to ensure a downtrodden Scotland.

Having now said that I shall be making no further comments on this or any related topics as it has become both tiresome and divisive.

In fact on further consideration I have decided that to prevent any further outburst I will be withdrawing fully from the Forum.

Thank you and may you all enjoy good health  and good golf.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 9, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			...
In fact on further consideration I have decided that to prevent any further outburst I will be withdrawing fully from the Forum.
...
		
Click to expand...

How peculiar!


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 9, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			How peculiar!

Click to expand...

Not really, the anti British sentiment being shown on forums across the tinternet and some of the blame game being displayed by the yes vote has even got to HID who has little interest in politics other than to use her vote.
It appears our Commonwealth Games tickets will be going in the bin.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 9, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Barnett Formula;

"No account is made of the amounts raised by taxation in each of the home nations, nor the relevant fiscal need (based on factors such as sparsity of population, cost of travel, unemployment rates, and health) in each area. The Barnett formula never claimed to address these issues and was a basic calculation on the basis of proportions of the population..."

Nice to see you're still using facts to support your case...
		
Click to expand...

apologies, taxation and barnett being so close to each other I assumed there was a direct correlation.We're about Â£50 short of UK GDP without oil, and about Â£900 ahead including oil.But yes, my statement was inaccurate.



Valentino said:



			And if it was that transparent do you seriously think the uk treasury would be adamant there would be no currency union?
		
Click to expand...

There seems to be a wee bit of movement from inside westminster on that topic of late.



SocketRocket said:



			You talk as if Scotland took no part in the decision making for the above issues.   Seems to me there are a disproportionate number of Scots in Parliament and they have in many cases supported wars,Trains and Nukes.   Are you also suggesting that Scots have not evaded tax?  Are you suggesting somehow that these things were English policy only?
		
Click to expand...

The trains I was talking about are the fancy new ones between London and Manchester,Crossrail,Channel Tunnel...we contribute(d) to those with pretty minimal return.Nuclear weapons are pretty much unpopular in Scotland, a small % of folk want them kept.And wars, well, Iraq was generally seen as unpopular throughout The UK, troops sent in on the back of lies.So Scotland has the chance to remove ourselves from the political war games and being at the call of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Scottish companies do indeed evade tax, we have the opportunity to simplify the single most complex taxation coding in the civilised world to make that evasion less possible.



MetalMickie said:



			In fact on further consideration I have decided that to prevent any further outburst I will be withdrawing fully from the Forum.

Thank you and may you all enjoy good health  and good golf.
		
Click to expand...

A wee bit extreme



Old Skier said:



			It appears our Commonwealth Games tickets will be going in the bin.
		
Click to expand...

This is excellent news.I think Glasgow will be operating the same procedure as London did, and by that I mean anyone not in attendance by a specific time will have their seat either re-sold or local youths allowed in for nothing.So thank you very much for your generous contribution to sporting activities in Scotland/Glasgow.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is excellent news.I think Glasgow will be operating the same procedure as London did, and by that I mean anyone not in attendance by a specific time will have their seat either re-sold or local youths allowed in for nothing.So thank you very much for your generous contribution to sporting activities in Scotland/Glasgow.
		
Click to expand...

I think you'll find I said in the bin so not sure how you'll get them resold or if the local youth would be spending the same amount on accommodation and other such things that credit card lil has the ability to do.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 9, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I think you'll find I said in the bin so not sure how you'll get them resold or if the local youth would be spending the same amount on accommodation and other such things that credit card lil has the ability to do.
		
Click to expand...

If you don't turn up and use your ticket by a certain time, they'll re-sell your ticket are let a wee tyke from possil in for nowt.You're contribution to Scotland will not go un noticed by me, it's generous, even to the point of not using a hotel room leaving it available for someone who enjoys being here instead of you is very kind.What a guy!


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			apologies, taxation and barnett being so close to each other I assumed there was a direct correlation.We're about Â£50 short of UK GDP without oil, and about Â£900 ahead including oil.But yes, my statement was inaccurate.
		
Click to expand...

So the oil will be your saviour... but the current Barnett formula sees the spending per head at Â£1,502 more in Scotland than England. Does that mean you'll have a Â£600 deficit if you try to match your current spending?

A needs assessment carried out in 2008 suggested that Scotland would lose Â£2.5billion if the same amount was spent per head across the UK. 

If you dig a little deeper into the UK's finances you'll see that the south east gets approx Â£6,100 spent per head, whilst the northeast gets Â£8,100 per head - Scotland at about Â£8,600. That kind of lays bare the often heard, "the southeast get everything."


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 9, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			So the oil will be your saviour... but the current Barnett formula sees the spending per head at Â£1,502 more in Scotland than England. Does that mean you'll have a Â£600 deficit if you try to match your current spending?
		
Click to expand...

Oil won't be our saviour, but it's certainly a cheeky wee bonus.And remember, those spending figures include the cost of things we (generally) have no interest in or desire...things I've mentioned previously.We'd be able to open up for exploration the apparent vast oil fields in the west, no guarantees, but lets at least have a wee look.It's all about the priorities a coutnry has...Scotland clearly has differing priorities to England,which is fine, lets both go about attaining those priorities in a civilised,fair way.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 9, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			So the oil will be your saviour... but the current Barnett formula sees the spending per head at Â£1,502 more in Scotland than England. Does that mean you'll have a Â£600 deficit if you try to match your current spending?

A needs assessment carried out in 2008 suggested that Scotland would lose Â£2.5billion if the same amount was spent per head across the UK. 

If you dig a little deeper into the UK's finances you'll see that the south east gets approx Â£6,100 spent per head, whilst the northeast gets Â£8,100 per head - Scotland at about Â£8,600. That kind of lays bare the often heard, "the southeast get everything."
		
Click to expand...

Lies, Damn(ed) Lies and Statistics!

You can manufacture anything you want from the use/misuse of Stats!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If you don't turn up and use your ticket by a certain time, they'll re-sell your ticket are let a wee tyke from possil in for nowt.You're contribution to Scotland will not go un noticed by me, it's generous, even to the point of not using a hotel room leaving it available for someone who enjoys being here instead of you is very kind.What a guy!
		
Click to expand...

I dont believe they can re sell the ticket that was bought by someone in the public 

In London the empty seats were due to tickets that were given to the "Olympic family" that weren't used and they then allowed other athletes and the military it sit there 

If someone has bought a ticket unless it's returned it can't be re sold. 

Same with hotel rooms - they can't sell the room again if it's already been bought


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 9, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I dont believe they can re sell the ticket that was bought by someone in the public 

In London the empty seats were due to tickets that were given to the "Olympic family" that weren't used and they then allowed other athletes and the military it sit there 

If someone has bought a ticket unless it's returned it can't be re sold. 



Same with hotel rooms - they can't sell the room again if it's already been bought
		
Click to expand...

Even better free tickets and rooms not used that have been paid for.

An expensive hissy fit by old skier [If he really had tickets to start with that is!]


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Even better free tickets and rooms not used that have been paid for.

An expensive hissy fit by old skier [If he really had tickets to start with that is!]
		
Click to expand...


You won't be able to use the seat though or the hotel room - they will just be empty 

Empty seats never looks good


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Even better free tickets and rooms not used that have been paid for.

An expensive hissy fit by old skier [If he really had tickets to start with that is!]
		
Click to expand...

The second part of that sentence came out all wrong, so apologies.
It was based on my frustration to obtain any tickets for any event due to the demand.

Between my daughter and myself we managed just two tickets for the rugby at Ibrox.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 9, 2014)

You know, it's a damned shame that someone wouldn't want to cross the border and visit Scotland, due to feeling unwelcome because of their nationality. I just hope that the poster was letting off some steam, but sometimes there is an anti English undercurrent to this debate ( not a reference to this thread, I'm talking about the debate in general ) which is both saddening and shameful imo.

For what it's worth (and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone here), our southern neighbours should always be made welcome regardless of how the vote goes.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 9, 2014)

c1973 said:



			You know, it's a damned shame that someone wouldn't want to cross the border and visit Scotland, due to feeling unwelcome because of their nationality. I just hope that the poster was letting off some steam, but sometimes there is an anti English undercurrent to this debate ( not a reference to this thread, I'm talking about the debate in general ) which is both saddening and shameful imo.

For what it's worth (and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone here), our southern neighbours should always be made welcome regardless of how the vote goes. 

Click to expand...

That's a great post and one which is very welcome 

It does appear at times that some people just can't wait to be "rid of us" and it does make people think and I feel sad that reading the thread has made me think a bit differently towards people that have shared some very good times in the past 

I lived in Scotland as a youngster and my family was made to feel very welcome - my little brother was born in Aberdeen.

I feel at times ashamed wishing that there is a yes vote so that people can get their wish


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 9, 2014)

I don't think I know one person who's anti-English ( excluding the obvious sporting rivalry, which is totally acceptable and hopefully reciprocated) I but know loads of Pro-Scottish folk, and there is a significant difference.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 9, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			That's a great post and one which is very welcome 

It does appear at times that some people just can't wait to be "rid of us" and it does make people think and I feel sad that reading the thread has made me think a bit differently towards people that have shared some very good times in the past 

I lived in Scotland as a youngster and my family was made to feel very welcome - my little brother was born in Aberdeen.

I feel at times ashamed wishing that there is a yes vote so that people can get their wish
		
Click to expand...

I can get very angry (inside) and disappointed when at home in Glasgow with some of the things I hear said about England and the English.  But until I left Scotland 30yrs ago my attitude may have been similar i.e. borne out of ignorance and prejudice.  Maybe some of the things said are said in jest and in the spirit of cross-border banter - but sometimes I'm not so sure.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 9, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			That's a great post and one which is very welcome 

It does appear at times that some people just can't wait to be "rid of us" and it does make people think and I feel sad that reading the thread has made me think a bit differently towards people that have shared some very good times in the past 

I lived in Scotland as a youngster and my family was made to feel very welcome - my little brother was born in Aberdeen.

I feel at times ashamed wishing that there is a yes vote so that people can get their wish
		
Click to expand...

Trust me, there are plenty of people in Scotland who want to remain in the UK and wish it was all over. Despite saying "the people of Scotland......" constantly, Salmond n Sturgeon do NOT speak for the majority, imo, and neither do their supporters. I reckon Scotland will get its wish, and remain in the UK.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 9, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Trust me, there are plenty of people in Scotland who want to remain in the UK and wish it was all over. Despite saying "the people of Scotland......" constantly, Salmond n Sturgeon do NOT speak for the majority, imo, and neither do their supporters. I reckon Scotland will get its wish, and remain in the UK.
		
Click to expand...


In really do hope a no vote happens 

Not for political reasons , not for nuclear reasons , financial reasons but purely for the reason that together the UK is great , together the UK is a wonderful nation , together the UK is a power , together the countries of the UK have stood together for centuries in the face of oppression. 

And I hope it's like that for more centuries to come.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I don't think I know one person who's anti-English ( excluding the obvious sporting rivalry, which is totally acceptable and hopefully reciprocated) I but know loads of Pro-Scottish folk, and there is a significant difference.
		
Click to expand...

I don't know too many who would admit it, one or two granted, but I've heard plenty of "they (bad word alert) English..........." comments in my time to believe it exists in some people.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 9, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			In really do hope a no vote happens 

Not for political reasons , not for nuclear reasons , financial reasons but purely for the reason that together the UK is great , together the UK is a wonderful nation , together the UK is a power , together the countries of the UK have stood together for centuries in the face of oppression. 

And I hope it's like that for more centuries to come.
		
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 9, 2014)

c1973 said:



			I don't know too many who would admit it, one or two granted, but I've heard plenty of "they (bad word alert) English..........." comments in my time to believe it exists in some people.
		
Click to expand...

Me too sadly, on all too many occasions.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The trains I was talking about are the fancy new ones between London and Manchester,Crossrail,Channel Tunnel...we contribute(d) to those with pretty minimal return.Nuclear weapons are pretty much unpopular in Scotland, a small % of folk want them kept.And wars, well, Iraq was generally seen as unpopular throughout The UK, troops sent in on the back of lies.So Scotland has the chance to remove ourselves from the political war games and being at the call of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Scottish companies do indeed evade tax, we have the opportunity to simplify the single most complex taxation coding in the civilised world to make that evasion less possible.
		
Click to expand...

You are being very Little Scotland with your views.  They are only pertinent if Scotland had been complete separate during the time when all these things were decided.

Are you really saying the Scottish man in the street had a completely different way of thinking on the projects you mention, why were they not marching on parliament if such things offended them so much? Money has also been spent on Scottish capital expenditure and probably at least pro rata to contribution, I would hazard a guess that it is more.   Do you really think the Channel Tunnel should not have been made because it was not doing enough for Scotland, anyhow I believe it was privately funded.

You seem to have missed my point over decisions made in Parliament on matters like defence, especially Nuclear Subs.  The decision to have and maintain a nuclear deterrent in the UK was one made by the UK as a whole, surely you don't believe Scotland should have had a veto on such things.  Again, do you honestly believe that once you drive past the border people suddenly change into pacifists with completely different views on defence.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 9, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			In really do hope a no vote happens 

Not for political reasons , not for nuclear reasons , financial reasons but purely for the reason that together the UK is great , together the UK is a wonderful nation , *together the UK is a power *, together the countries of the UK have stood together for centuries in the face of oppression. 

And I hope it's like that for more centuries to come.
		
Click to expand...

Is that genuinely important to you?



SocketRocket said:



			You are being very Little Scotland with your views.  They are only pertinent if Scotland had been complete separate during the time when all these things were decided.

Are you really saying the Scottish man in the street had a completely different way of thinking on the projects you mention, why were they not marching on parliament if such things offended them so much? Money has also been spent on Scottish capital expenditure and probably at least pro rata to contribution, I would hazard a guess that it is more.   Do you really think the Channel Tunnel should not have been made because it was not doing enough for Scotland, anyhow I believe it was privately funded.

You seem to have missed my point over decisions made in Parliament on matters like defence, especially Nuclear Subs.  The decision to have and maintain a nuclear deterrent in the UK was one made by the UK as a whole, surely you don't believe Scotland should have had a veto on such things.  *Again, do you honestly believe that once you drive past the border people suddenly change into pacifists with completely different views on defence.*

Click to expand...

I think we have a different set of priorities,yes.As highlighted by my highlighting of Phil above.England/English do seem to be hung up on being a 'power', to be a leader on the world stage.I honestly don't think that's very relevant to most Scottish folk.

And my point about trains etc was they make no difference to our lives, yet we still contribute to them, just like The M25...but holyrood has to fund the new forthcrossing or A90 upgrade or the commie games...yet we contribute to the olympics!...it's skewed.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 9, 2014)

Yes UK staying together is important to me 

Strength in unity

And you seem it be making calls for all of Scotland as opposed to just YOU

You are posting "WE" - do you speak for all of Scotland because I can see a number of Scottish on here who don't agree with you and your views in what is good for Scotland


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 9, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Yes UK staying together is important to me 

Strength in unity

And you seem it be making calls for all of Scotland as opposed to just YOU

You are posting "WE" - do you speak for all of Scotland because I can see a number of Scottish on here who don't agree with you and your views in what is good for Scotland
		
Click to expand...

Fair point, for we read I


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I think we have a different set of priorities,yes.As highlighted by my highlighting of Phil above.England/English do seem to be hung up on being a 'power', to be a leader on the world stage.I honestly don't think that's very relevant to most Scottish folk.

And my point about trains etc was they make no difference to our lives, yet we still contribute to them, just like The M25...but holyrood has to fund the new forthcrossing or A90 upgrade or the commie games...yet we contribute to the olympics!...it's skewed.
		
Click to expand...

So you don't think the rest of the UK have contributed positively to Capital projects in Scotland?   I guess in your opinion (and in your opinion the vast majority of Scotts) we are a greedy, warlike bunch of senseless power hungry morons that you are better off away from then.  Is that about right?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 9, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			So you don't think the rest of the UK have contributed positively to Capital projects in Scotland?   I guess in your opinion (and in your opinion the vast majority of Scotts) we are a greedy, warlike bunch of senseless morons that you are better off away from then.  Is that about right?
		
Click to expand...


Show me anything, _anything_ I've posted on here that remotely suggests that.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Show me anything, _anything_ I've posted on here that remotely suggests that.
		
Click to expand...


I also get the feeling that is your opinion also


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 9, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I also get the feeling that is your opinion also
		
Click to expand...

Well thats days more about you than me, imo.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Well thats days more about you than me, imo.
		
Click to expand...


Sorry but it's the general feeling I get from you 

You appear that you can't wait it be rid if us and you see us as a chain around your neck that is holding Scotland back

You are obviously pro Scotland but at times that appears anti anyone but Scotland


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 9, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Trust me, there are plenty of people in Scotland who want to remain in the UK and wish it was all over. Despite saying "the people of Scotland......" constantly, Salmond n Sturgeon do NOT speak for the majority, imo, and neither do their supporters. I reckon Scotland will get its wish, and remain in the UK.
		
Click to expand...

Well as they were voted into power with a system that was specifically designed to keep them out I think that they do speak for the people of Scotland.
Perhaps if a few more folk had bothered to get off their backsides and vote that could have made a difference.

But they did not.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Show me anything, _anything_ I've posted on here that remotely suggests that.
		
Click to expand...

Without me digging past this page :

"England/English do seem to be hung up on being a 'power', to be a leader on the world stage"

"Scotland has the chance to remove ourselves from the political war games and being at the call of Pennsylvania Avenue."


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 9, 2014)

I have scratched my head and had a wee thunk and I cannot think of one major Scottish infrastructure project that has been joint funded with rUK. [Within the last 20 years.] 
I am pretty sure but not certain that we paid for our own Parliament.

I am sure that I have probably opened the floodgates though!

PS I am excluding lottery funding.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 9, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			So the oil will be your saviour... but the current Barnett formula sees the spending per head at Â£1,502 more in Scotland than England. Does that mean you'll have a Â£600 deficit if you try to match your current spending?

A needs assessment carried out in 2008 suggested that Scotland would lose Â£2.5billion if the same amount was spent per head across the UK. 

If you dig a little deeper into the UK's finances you'll see that the south east gets approx Â£6,100 spent per head, whilst the northeast gets Â£8,100 per head - Scotland at about Â£8,600. That kind of lays bare the often heard, "the southeast get everything."
		
Click to expand...




Foxholer said:



			Lies, Damn(ed) Lies and Statistics!

You can manufacture anything you want from the use/misuse of Stats!
		
Click to expand...

Not from the Daily Mail Foxy... taken from the ONS website. Maybe you should try a reputable site occasionally.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well as they were voted into power with a system that was specifically designed to keep them out I think that they do speak for the people of Scotland.
Perhaps if a few more folk had bothered to get off their backsides and vote that could have made a difference.

But they did not.
		
Click to expand...

I think the system was designed to ensure no one party obtained a clear majority. No?

From memory I believe more people voted for the other three main parties than the snp though, so again I would suggest they do not speak for the majority. 

Certainly, they have a mandate to run the country, but as they claim the Yes campaign is not only the snp, but encompasses others, I fail to see the significance of the parliamentary result in this debate anyway.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I have scratched my head and had a wee thunk and I cannot think of one major Scottish infrastructure project that has been joint funded with rUK. [Within the last 20 years.] 
I am pretty sure but not certain that we paid for our own Parliament.

I am sure that I have probably opened the floodgates though!

PS I am excluding lottery funding.
		
Click to expand...

Most major projects are undertaken with EU funds, are they not?  Freely admit to being unsure about this though.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 9, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Most major projects are undertaken with EU funds, are they not?  Freely admit to being unsure about this though.
		
Click to expand...

I believe any millennium projects were funded by a joint fund ?


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			An expensive hissy fit by old skier [If he really had tickets to start with that is!]
		
Click to expand...

Selective reading again or is it just the Buckies. It wasn't me but HID that has binned it and why would you suggest that I have lied or is it just another of your anti British wind ups. You really are turning into a bit of a tart.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The second part of that sentence came out all wrong, so apologies.
It was based on my frustration to obtain any tickets for any event due to the demand.

Between my daughter and myself we managed just two tickets for the rugby at Ibrox.
		
Click to expand...

just seen it and accepted. And part of my tickets where for the 1/4, semi and finals of the sevens so I am not a happy teddy either.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 9, 2014)

c1973 said:



			You know, it's a damned shame that someone wouldn't want to cross the border and visit Scotland, due to feeling unwelcome because of their nationality. I just hope that the poster was letting off some steam, but sometimes there is an anti English undercurrent to this debate ( not a reference to this thread, I'm talking about the debate in general ) which is both saddening and shameful imo.

For what it's worth (and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone here), our southern neighbours should always be made welcome regardless of how the vote goes. 

Click to expand...

For the record I am not English, I have always classed myself as British but the old man insisted that we sprogs are officially Welsh.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 9, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Most major projects are undertaken with EU funds, are they not?  Freely admit to being unsure about this though.
		
Click to expand...

EU funds means giving us some of our own money back.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I have scratched my head and had a wee thunk and I cannot think of one major Scottish infrastructure project that has been joint funded with rUK. [Within the last 20 years.] 
I am pretty sure but not certain that we paid for our own Parliament.

I am sure that I have probably opened the floodgates though!

PS I am excluding lottery funding.
		
Click to expand...

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]The final cost of the Scottish Parliament building was Â£414.4m, a breakdown of which can be found in the Holyrood Project Close-Out report (148KB pdf).[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]The Holyrood Building Project was funded using conventional public funding arrangements for major Scottish capital projects - that is to say, it was funded from the Scottish Consolidated Fund, also known as the Block Grant.

I think you may find that the Block Grant comes out from the UK tax payer. Plus the Â£72 million a year paid for by the UK tax payer for the upkeep and running of them place.
[/FONT]


----------



## Val (Apr 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I have scratched my head and had a wee thunk and I cannot think of one major Scottish infrastructure project that has been joint funded with rUK. [Within the last 20 years.] 
I am pretty sure but not certain that we paid for our own Parliament.

I am sure that I have probably opened the floodgates though!

PS I am excluding lottery funding.
		
Click to expand...

Anything paid for by the Scottish government has had some payment of sorts from Westminister, whether it be the new forth crossing, sky bridge etc etc


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 10, 2014)

New report out that most students in England and Wales will be paying back their tuition fees until they are 50 years old.

One area where I think Scotland has better priorities.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			New report out that most students in England and Wales will be paying back their tuition fees until they are 50 years old.

*One area where I think Scotland has better Government funding*.
		
Click to expand...


Fixed that for you.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 10, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Fixed that for you.
		
Click to expand...

Nah its all Scottish pounds you know.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 10, 2014)

Here's a wee videothat confirms we do indeed have better govt funding and the reasons why we should possibly have even more.I know there's a few on here that like stats,facts and figures, so fill yer boots...

[video=youtube;1W8cKHcZn60]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1W8cKHcZn60[/video]


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 10, 2014)

Did start watching but it did become a little one sided and his opening remarks made things sound biased which became a tad of a turn off.
And as he says "everyone can put their spin on figures".


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 10, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Not from the Daily Mail Foxy... taken from the ONS website. Maybe you should try a reputable site occasionally.
		
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter whether the source is trusted or not, the same applies.

Where do you think the Daily Mail (or Guardian, or any Newspaper) gets its info from?

ONS is at least trustworthy - even rebuffing Gordon Broon's attempts to reclassify certain debt as 'off book'.

And those figures are very old - 2008 - before either country's last elections and almost before Scotland's previous one!

Btw. A few years earlier and it would have been my old big boss (Len Cook, who was/is quite small) that produced those Statistics. He was quite 'happy' to admit that Statistics could be twisted.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 10, 2014)

A2D, I think we all agree, and many have said, stats can be twisted to suit the argument therefore I must score that 2/10. Must go, RND calling for a free round ne:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 10, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I think you may find that the Block Grant comes out from the UK tax payer. Plus the Â£72 million a year paid for by the UK tax payer for the upkeep and running of them place.
		
Click to expand...

So some might say that Scotland lives off handouts from the UK government 

Wonder if that handout will be cut in the years following a NO.  Certainly the most recent Westminster budgets are telling of significant reductions in spending over the coming years to reduce the UK deficit - and they will happen regardless of who is in government in Westminster.  So a NO vote is cast in the full knowledge that cuts are coming.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 10, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			A2D, I think we all agree, and many have said, stats can be twisted to suit the argument therefore I must score that 2/10. Must go, RND calling for a free round ne:
		
Click to expand...

I'd agree, if you could provide me with an alternative pov using the same stats, ideally not from a politician, but somone engaged in defending the no vote?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Apr 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So some might say that Scotland lives off handouts from the UK government 

Wonder if that handout will be cut in the years following a NO.  Certainly the most recent Westminster budgets are telling of significant reductions in spending over the coming years to reduce the UK deficit - and they will happen regardless of who is in government in Westminster.  So a NO vote is cast in the full knowledge that cuts are coming.
		
Click to expand...

So you don't think a Scottish Government, with the inherited debt as you mostly all accept you would have to take, would make cuts?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 10, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			So you don't think a Scottish Government, with the inherited debt as you mostly all accept you would have to take, would make cuts?
		
Click to expand...


It's the choice of where to make cuts that's essential.Maybe we'd like to cut corp tax to stimulate inward investment, maybe we'd cut housing benefit or job seekers allowance, maybe we'd cut our military spend or education budget.Having the choice is the main point.


----------



## Val (Apr 10, 2014)

Latest reports suggest support for a YES vote has fallen to 37% from 39%


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Apr 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It's the choice of where to make cuts that's essential.Maybe we'd like to cut corp tax to stimulate inward investment, maybe we'd cut housing benefit or job seekers allowance, maybe we'd cut our military spend or education budget.Having the choice is the main point.
		
Click to expand...

I understand that, but SILH was implying that these cuts would only exist in a post-No world, at least that was the way it seemed to me!


----------



## CMAC (Apr 10, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Latest reports suggest support for a YES vote has fallen to 37% from 39%
		
Click to expand...

where are these reports and polls- I STILL dont know anyone on this planet who has been polled.


My prediction of a mid-high 20's percentile for yes and mid-high 70's percentile for no I still feel is valid.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 10, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Latest reports suggest support for a YES vote has fallen to 37% from 39%
		
Click to expand...

Just had a quite look at the obvious media outlets who would carry such news..,.BBC/Telegraph and no sign, where you seeing this?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 10, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I understand that, but SILH was implying that these cuts would only exist in a post-No world, at least that was the way it seemed to me!
		
Click to expand...

No actually I didn't.  I said that a NO vote would be made in the 100% certainty (and certainty is in short supply in this debate) that Scotland and the Scottish electorate will suffer cuts in many funding streams coming from Westminster.  What *might* happen in the circumstances of a YES is uncertain.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Just had a quite look at the obvious media outlets who would carry such news..,.BBC/Telegraph and no sign, where you seeing this?
		
Click to expand...

Found it here.....

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-blow-alex-salmond-record-3394387

"No" vote also fell (by 1%), support for "undecided" on the rise.....


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Found it here.....

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-blow-alex-salmond-record-3394387

"No" vote also fell (by 1%), support for "undecided" on the rise.....
		
Click to expand...

Ta.wouldn't have thought to look at the record.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 10, 2014)

Best joke of the campaign is from Alisdair Carmichael.

When he was a young MP he was in an hotel in London with some colleagues. At the bar he was approached by a very pretty girl and they got chatting. 
When he went back to his group they inquired about the girl.
'We had a lot in common' said Alisdair 'She said she was a Coll Girl and as you know I'm from Tiree.'


----------



## Val (Apr 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Just had a quite look at the obvious media outlets who would carry such news..,.BBC/Telegraph and no sign, where you seeing this?
		
Click to expand...

The working mans poll 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-blow-alex-salmond-record-3394387


Edit - Beat me to it FD


----------



## Val (Apr 10, 2014)

CMAC said:



			where are these reports and polls- I STILL dont know anyone on this planet who has been polled.


My prediction of a mid-high 20's percentile for yes and mid-high 70's percentile for no I still feel is valid.
		
Click to expand...

I dont think it will be quite the landslide as that but in excess of 60% NO imo

And i've yet to be asked by an official outlet either and like you I dont know anyone who has.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 11, 2014)

I hear the NaeSayers have a new anthem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYmjW9_YJ7E


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No actually I didn't.  I said that a NO vote would be made in the 100% certainty (and certainty is in short supply in this debate) that Scotland and the Scottish electorate will suffer cuts in many funding streams coming from Westminster.  What *might* happen in the circumstances of a YES is uncertain.
		
Click to expand...

We are all going to suffer cuts. Why do you word everything like the RUK have a down on Scotland. Lighten up.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 11, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			We are all going to suffer cuts. Why do you word everything like the RUK have a down on Scotland. Lighten up.
		
Click to expand...

Thats spot on.  The deficit has only been reduced by around a third.   The cuts have not scratched the surface yet.


----------



## Iaing (Apr 11, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			We are all going to suffer cuts.
		
Click to expand...

Please enlighten us as to what cuts will affect you.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 11, 2014)

Iaing said:



			Please enlighten us as to what cuts will affect you.
		
Click to expand...

Nothings specific about him, we are all going to see cuts affecting us, whether it be council tax, benefits, health or defence.  

Please enlighten us on which cuts wont affect you?


----------



## NWJocko (Apr 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No actually I didn't.  I said that a NO vote would be made in the 100% certainty (and certainty is in short supply in this debate) that Scotland and the Scottish electorate will suffer cuts in many funding streams coming from Westminster.
		
Click to expand...

On what do you base this?  You have examples to prove the "100% certainty"?


----------



## Iaing (Apr 11, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Nothings specific about him, we are all going to see cuts affecting us, whether it be council tax, benefits, health or defence.  

Please enlighten us on which cuts wont affect you?
		
Click to expand...

It would be nice to see council tax cut as you say. But I really don't think it is going to happen. Frozen will do. :thup:


----------



## Iaing (Apr 12, 2014)

Oh! And benefits cuts won't affect me either. Nor you Socketrocket, given your preoccupation with them.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 12, 2014)

Iaing said:



			Oh! And benefits cuts won't affect me either. Nor you Socketrocket, given your preoccupation with them.
		
Click to expand...

Cuts to local authorities mean more council tax for you (thought you might have gathered that)  You may find your winter fuel allowance and bus pass has vanished when you are of a certain age, you may also be paying for a visit to the Doctor or ANE .   They wont affect me but I have been raised to stand on my own two feet rather than think its someone else's responsibility to house and feed me.


----------



## Iaing (Apr 12, 2014)

My council tax bill hasn't risen for six years. As I'm Scottish, I thought you might have gathered that.


----------



## Iaing (Apr 12, 2014)

Oh. And I will also stand on my own two feet thanks. But I like to think I have enough humanity to worry about others who might be affected by the cuts you mention.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 12, 2014)

Anyone watch the Panorama benefits programme on London.
That was interesting, one guy was getting Â£44k a year to help pay for his accommodation and the upkeep of his 7 children.
He was working and earning Â£150pw
The council concerned were shifting all the poor folk out of London and sending them to Birmingham.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

Another round of cuts are coming, for an indy Scotland or United Kingdom, I can't see how that can be disputed.We've all been part of the system that has grown the debt, we're all gonna be hit one way or another with the cuts.

Where the cuts are made is the big question, and whether the cuts made by a conservative led Westminster govt reflect the desires of Scotland ( post yes or no) is the question.There is a debate as to whether the Conservatives will win re-election or whether Labour will replace them (I personally think Conservatives win a majority-no way is England voting Milliband in) makes no real difference, both parties are mirror images of each other.

So, replace the convoluted tax system with something significantly easier to cut tax avoidance,cut spending on replacing trident,or cut the benefit system to out of work/can't work folk?What section of society represented above can represent themselves sufficiently to stave of the cuts?Corporations and their lobbiests?Or the folk unable to work?

I know there is a significant part of English folk who would agree that tax avoidance/replacing trident is a terrible idea, but unless you want to move to Scotland (and you're very welcome to do so), you're stuck with Westminster and the choices they make.Up here in Scotland we have the opportunity to remove ourselves from trident and a taxation system that almost encourages tax avoidance.So voting YES will allow us to decide on our govt, and replace that govt if they don't do what we want.Currently that option isn't available.


----------



## CMAC (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Another round of cuts are coming, for an indy Scotland or United Kingdom, I can't see how that can be disputed.We've all been part of the system that has grown the debt, we're all gonna be hit one way or another with the cuts.

Where the cuts are made is the big question, and whether the cuts made by a conservative led Westminster govt reflect the desires of Scotland ( post yes or no) is the question.There is a debate as to whether the Conservatives will win re-election or whether Labour will replace them (I personally think Conservatives win a majority-no way is England voting Milliband in) makes no real difference, both parties are mirror images of each other.

So, replace the convoluted tax system with something significantly easier to cut tax avoidance,cut spending on replacing trident,or cut the benefit system to out of work/can't work folk?What section of society represented above can represent themselves sufficiently to stave of the cuts?Corporations and their lobbiests?Or the folk unable to work?

I know there is a significant part of English folk who would agree that tax avoidance/replacing trident is a terrible idea, but unless you want to move to Scotland (and you're very welcome to do so), you're stuck with Westminster and the choices they make*.Up here in Scotland we have the opportunity to remove ourselves from trident* and a taxation system that almost encourages tax avoidance.So voting YES will allow us to decide on our govt, and replace that govt if they don't do what we want.Currently that option isn't available.
		
Click to expand...

is that financially or physically if salmond has his way leaving us without a deterrent


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

CMAC said:



			is that financially or physically if salmond has his way leaving us without a deterrent
		
Click to expand...

One follows the other,does it not?Without financing it, it physically doesn't exist, or if you don't physically have it, you don't need to finance it.I'm not sure I follow your thought process?

And why mention Salmond?, the removal of WMD's from Scotland is significantly bigger than one man.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 12, 2014)

We won't leave ourselves without a nuclear deterrent - think that's going to be a guarentee


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			We won't leave ourselves without a nuclear deterrent - think that's going to be a guarentee
		
Click to expand...

You could be correct,and we might be going round in circles here, but what if Scotland does vote YES and demands that, given rUK isn't prepared to enter into a currency union, All nuclear submarines,missiles and warheads are removed from Scotland prior to our independence day, what does rUK do?

The actual subs can go to various places, the missiles could maybe be sent back to their owners in America, the warheads sent to Aldermaston, but where to put them altogether?There is no alternative.The suggestion that rUK will say 'tough, we're staying at Faslane' isn't realistic, you can't use American or French bases for various legalities, it will take too long to build an replacement so if rUK play hard ball with iScotland, you may well have to be without a nuclear deterrent.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			You could be correct,and we might be going round in circles here, but what if Scotland does vote YES and demands that, given rUK isn't prepared to enter into a currency union, All nuclear submarines,missiles and warheads are removed from Scotland prior to our independence day, what does rUK do?

The actual subs can go to various places, the missiles could maybe be sent back to their owners in America, the warheads sent to Aldermaston, but where to put them altogether?There is no alternative.The suggestion that rUK will say 'tough, we're staying at Faslane' isn't realistic, you can't use American or French bases for various legalities, it will take too long to build an replacement so if rUK play hard ball with iScotland, you may well have to be without a nuclear deterrent.
		
Click to expand...

You are going round in circles 

Trident will stay - regardless of any currency union blah blah blah


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You are going round in circles 

Trident will stay - regardless of any currency union blah blah blah
		
Click to expand...

sorry, trident will stay in Scotland,even if we vote yes?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			sorry, trident will stay in Scotland,even if we vote yes?
		
Click to expand...

Of course it will.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Of course it will.
		
Click to expand...


No, it won't.But keep convincing yourself and hope No wins, you'll be in a for a big surprise if it doesn't.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



*No, it won't*.But keep convincing yourself and hope No wins, you'll be in a for a big surprise if it doesn't.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but what exactly are you ( Scotland ) going to do - ship them out yourselves somewhere ? 

Scotland will be "forced" to keep them exactly where they are - the US as part of NATO will want them exactly where they are - and do you really think that "IF" you vote yes that you are going to reject what the US and NATO say ? Sorry but not going to happen - it's not William Wallace times


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Sorry but what exactly are you ( Scotland ) going to do - ship them out yourselves somewhere ? 

Scotland will be "forced" to keep them exactly where they are - the US as part of NATO will want them exactly where they are - and do you really think that "IF" you vote yes that you are going to reject what the US and NATO say ? Sorry but not going to happen - it's not William Wallace times
		
Click to expand...

This is incredible.A democratic country that has publicly and constantly been against WMD's being sited on their land, who have backed the removal of these weapons will be told that no, you will keep them there against the will of the nation because America said so?I know you honestly think this will happen, I know there is no convincing you otherwise, which makes me question your ability to rationalise democracy,decency and the right of nations.What you are suggesting is the single most undemocratic,north korea-esque type action I can think of.Only the unhinged could think this is a realistic course of action.You're mental if you think this is an option.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

Lets look at it another way.America/NATO need a North Atlantic base, Iceland is the obvious place but Icelanders categorically refuse to have WMD's in their country.America tells Iceland, sorry, I know you don't want nukes but we're just gonna come along and put them there anyway...don't like it?Tough.

Aye.Right.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Sorry but what exactly are you ( Scotland ) going to do - ship them out yourselves somewhere ? 

Scotland will be "forced" to keep them exactly where they are - the US as part of NATO will want them exactly where they are - and do you really think that "IF" you vote yes that you are going to reject what the US and NATO say ? Sorry but not going to happen - it's not William Wallace times
		
Click to expand...

Where is 'the bangs head against door' smiley


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is incredible.A democratic country that has publicly and constantly been against WMD's being sited on their land, who have backed the removal of these weapons will be told that no, you will keep them there against the will of the nation because America said so?I know you honestly think this will happen, I know there is no convincing you otherwise, which makes me question your ability to rationalise democracy,decency and the right of nations.What you are suggesting is the single most undemocratic,north korea-esque type action I can think of.Only the unhinged could think this is a realistic course of action.You're mental if you think this is an option.
		
Click to expand...

A deal will be made between Scotland , UK and US to keep Trident exactly where it is - what that deal will be who knows but a deal will be made. It will be a very "lucrative deal financially" for Scotland and they will stay there. Your newly elected government ( if there is a yes ) will do what is needed to get security financially.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			A deal will be made between Scotland , UK and US to keep Trident exactly where it is - what that deal will be who knows but a deal will be made. It will be a very "lucrative deal financially" for Scotland and they will stay there. Your newly elected government ( if there is a yes ) will do what is needed to get security financially.
		
Click to expand...

There could be a five year deal, _maybe_ 10, allowing rUK to build an alternative, but no way, under any circumstances, will there be long term nuclear warheads in iScotland,no way.And your suggestion we'll be bullied into it is tyrannical and laughable at the same time.

All of that depends on how Westminster approaches the negotiations with Holyrood, we could still say nope, remove them please and they will have to be removed,no matter what you think.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There could be a five year deal, _maybe_ 10, allowing rUK to build an alternative, but no way, under any circumstances, will there be long term nuclear warheads in iScotland,no way.And your suggestion we'll be bullied into it is tyrannical and laughable at the same time.

All of that depends on how Westminster approaches the negotiations with Holyrood, we could still say nope, remove them please and they will have to be removed,no matter what you think.
		
Click to expand...

UK gets bullied as it is because we need the US - they are massively important financially important to Europe 

Are you suggesting that little old Scotland would be able to say no to them ?! 

Dreamworld - proper dream world 

If the US and NATO Offered billions to the Scottish economy in terms of long term deals to keep trident where it is -do you really believe your government will say - Nope - we don't need your backing or your money and we are going to be wonderful all on our own. Are you voting in Snow White ? 

How many American backed companies currently reside in Scotland providing valuable employment and valuable finance ? 

Do you really believe you won't need the US ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			UK gets bullied as it is because we need the US - they are massively important financially important to Europe 

Are you suggesting that little old Scotland would be able to say no to them ?! 

Dreamworld - proper dream world 

If the US and NATO Offered billions to the Scottish economy in terms of long term deals to keep trident where it is -do you really believe your government will say - Nope - we don't need your backing or your money and we are going to be wonderful all on our own. Are you voting in Snow White ? 

How many American backed companies currently reside in Scotland providing valuable employment and valuable finance ? 

*Do you really believe you won't need the US ?*

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I've ever said that.iScotland would be wanting to have good relations with any international partner,America,BRIC countries,Europe,Asia etc.We'll not be bribed,though, or have you never met a Scottish person?Tell us we can't do something and the likleihood is we'll try even harder to do just that.The world doesn't begin and end with America.

anyway, we'll see soon enough.


----------



## Imurg (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There could be a five year deal, _maybe_ 10, allowing rUK to build an alternative, but no way, under any circumstances, will there be long term nuclear warheads in iScotland,no way.And your suggestion we'll be bullied into it is tyrannical and laughable at the same time.

All of that depends on how Westminster approaches the negotiations with Holyrood, we could still say nope, remove them please and they will have to be removed,no matter what you think.
		
Click to expand...

With the greatest of respect for your opinion, to say, with the absolute certainty this post implies, what a Government containing Politicians of any colour will or will not do is absurd. This whole thread contains speculation, nothing more. To be able to say this or that will happen means you must have a crystal ball.....There is no certainty.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

Imurg said:



			With the greatest of respect for your opinion, to say, with the absolute certainty this post implies, what a Government containing Politicians of any colour will or will not do is absurd. This whole thread contains speculation, nothing more. To be able to say this or that will happen means you must have a crystal ball.....There is no certainty.
		
Click to expand...

I know for a fact that no political party in iScotland will ever support the continuing placement of trident in the clyde, for the simple reason they'd never win an election.No matter what folks political leanings are, the majority do not want to fund/replace/house wmd's in Scotland.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I know for a fact that no political party in iScotland will ever support the continuing placement of trident in the clyde, for the simple reason they'd never win an election.No matter what folks political leanings are, the majority do not want to fund/replace/house wmd's in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...


What about the Scottish people whose jobs and livelihood relies on Faslane ? 

And what people want will suddenly change when money comes into it


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not sure I've ever said that.iScotland would be wanting to have good relations with any international partner,America,BRIC countries,Europe,Asia etc.We'll not be bribed,though, or have you never met a Scottish person?Tell us we can't do something and the likleihood is we'll try even harder to do just that.The world doesn't begin and end with America.

anyway, we'll see soon enough.
		
Click to expand...

You will have little standing in the world against the bigger powerful nations - you go against them and you get cut off 

They hold the financial key - it would be naive to think different


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What about the Scottish people whose jobs and livelihood relies on Faslane ? 

And what people want will suddenly change when money comes into it
		
Click to expand...

Faslane will be the base for whatever military Scotland has post yes.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			All of that depends on how Westminster approaches the negotiations with Holyrood, we could still say nope, remove them please and they will have to be removed,no matter what you think.
		
Click to expand...

Really? and who is going to enforce that removal?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Really? and who is going to enforce that removal?
		
Click to expand...

The A Team or The Avengers.

There you go, a reply at the same level as the question.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The A Team or The Avengers.

There you go, a reply at the same level as the question.
		
Click to expand...

Which was exactly at the same level as your point, try a sensible answer if you can think of one.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Faslane will be the base for whatever military Scotland has post yes.
		
Click to expand...

Is this the military Salmond is dreaming off in his white paper ?

A lot of people in Faslane specialise in Subs - are you getting subs now ? Will you pay the same as the UK military ? 

So will that military be part of NATO ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Which was exactly at the same level as your point, try a sensible answer if you can think of one.
		
Click to expand...

The UN,it's kinda their job.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The UN,it's kinda their job.
		
Click to expand...

Ah, the UN, that fairly toothless organisation, a lot of well intentioned hot air and that's about it.  Remind me, in the event of needing military muscle, who do they tend to turn to?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 12, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Ah, the UN, that fairly toothless organisation, a lot of well intentioned hot air and that's about it.  Remind me, in the event of needing military muscle, who do they tend to turn to?
		
Click to expand...

Each and every country that is a member, UN peace keeping forces are made up of many countries.Are you suggesting military muscle would be needed to keep iScotland a nuclear haven?
http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Each and every country that is a member, UN peace keeping forces are made up of many countries.Are you suggesting military muscle would be needed to keep iScotland a nuclear haven?
http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/

Click to expand...

I imagine the conversation would go something like this:

Fat Eck: Can you remove your nukes please?
HMG: when we are ready.
Fat Eck:  We want them gone immediately.
HMG: When we are ready.
UN: Fat Eck wants you to move your nukes.
HMG: Yes and we have told him they will be moved when we are ready.
UN: Oh, ok then


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 12, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Really? and who is going to enforce that removal?
		
Click to expand...

We will send in our one man terrorist buster guy from Glasgow airport!

A nuclear free iScotland is a big vote winner in Scotland. It may not be the case in England but no matter how many times you deny it the Scottish voters cannot be ignored.

For the SNP it would be akin to Gleggs university fees pledge.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 12, 2014)

There you go

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26988395

No going back


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			We won't leave ourselves without a nuclear deterrent - think that's going to be a guarentee
		
Click to expand...

I agree, but all for the wrong reasons.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			There you go

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26988395

No going back
		
Click to expand...

You will give us 10 years to move them, we will say thank you very much, you then come under the protection of the NATO umbrella. We fail to make the 10 year deadline.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 12, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			You will give us 10 years to move them, we will say thank you very much, you then come under the protection of the NATO umbrella. We fail to make the 10 year deadline.
		
Click to expand...

Trident is going to be sooooooooo yesterdays man in 10 years.
Might as well bring back Polaris.


----------



## Val (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			You could be correct,and we might be going round in circles here, but what if Scotland does vote YES and demands that, given rUK isn't prepared to enter into a currency union, All nuclear submarines,missiles and warheads are removed from Scotland prior to our independence day, what does rUK do?

The actual subs can go to various places, the missiles could maybe be sent back to their owners in America, the warheads sent to Aldermaston, but where to put them altogether?There is no alternative.The suggestion that rUK will say 'tough, we're staying at Faslane' isn't realistic, you can't use American or French bases for various legalities, it will take too long to build an replacement so if rUK play hard ball with iScotland, you may well have to be without a nuclear deterrent.
		
Click to expand...

You are wrongly assuming the SNP will be the majority party in power to do this though.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 12, 2014)

Val, who else would there be?
Labour is bound to make a comeback but I think it may be a few years and a change of leadership before they overtake the SNP.
The other parties are dead in the water with the exception of the Greens.


----------



## CMAC (Apr 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



*I know for a fact that no political party in iScotland will ever support the continuing placement of trident in the clyde*, for the simple reason they'd never win an election.No matter what folks political leanings are, the majority do not want to fund/replace/house wmd's in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

care to share the source and evidence?


Doon frae Troon said:



*A nuclear free iScotland is a big vote winner in Scotland.* It may not be the case in England but no matter how many times you deny it the Scottish voters cannot be ignored.

For the SNP it would be akin to Gleggs university fees pledge.
		
Click to expand...

in your opinion


----------



## Imurg (Apr 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			A nuclear free iScotland is a big vote winner in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

So the Referendum is cut and dried then.........if the Yes campaign has this as part of their manifesto, why isn't the Yes vote walking it in the opinion polls?


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Anyone watch the Panorama benefits programme on London.
That was interesting, one guy was getting Â£44k a year to help pay for his accommodation and the upkeep of his 7 children.
He was working and earning Â£150pw
The council concerned were shifting all the poor folk out of London and sending them to Birmingham.
		
Click to expand...

Guess he is still a lot better off than he was in Palastine with his seven kids under nine years of age.   Brent council were trying to help these people to find housing that they could afford to pay for with their benefits.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 12, 2014)

Iaing said:



			Oh. And I will also stand on my own two feet thanks. But I like to think I have enough humanity to worry about others who might be affected by the cuts you mention.
		
Click to expand...

Why do you insist in putting words into my mouth.   I have every sympathy with people who are genuinely in hard times and trying to improve, also for those that are not able to work due to genuine dissability.   I happen to detest people that are spending other peoples money rather than work for it themselves.

Do you think this is a harsh view?  Or, are you just blinded by your own prejudice on anything I post.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Trident is going to be sooooooooo yesterdays man in 10 years.
Might as well bring back Polaris.
		
Click to expand...

Is so yesterday today but I don't want to be near by when it goes bang.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 12, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Is so yesterday today but I don't want to be near by when it goes bang.
		
Click to expand...

If you have nuclear weapons you have to be prepared to use them.

Towards the end of WW2 my father was one of the first across the Rhine, German border and to free the concentration camps. He told me that nuclear weapons will never be used again as no one will win that conflict. I tend to go along with his thinking.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If you have nuclear weapons you have to be prepared to use them.

Towards the end of WW2 my father was one of the first across the Rhine, German border and to free the concentration camps. He told me that nuclear weapons will never be used again as no one will win that conflict. I tend to go along with his thinking.
		
Click to expand...

Not wishing to go to far off track, that was my argument in a debate with ex mil and some MPs. If your not going to use them don't have them. Retaliatory strikes are useless as by then it's to late.
However on a Faulder Gap ex the sceptic in charge really bothered us when he said, "don't worry, if the Russkies come through there we will send in a tac nuc to stop them"' filled us with a lovely warm feeling as that was our war position.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 13, 2014)

A view from Washington-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...fb39f3-96d2-487a-ab4f-cde8de596424_story.html


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 13, 2014)

Might be of interest to some, Salmonds full speech from yesterday

[video=youtube;vqZDF_ycRAE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqZDF_ycRAE[/video]


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 13, 2014)

You do know there is golf on the telly don't you.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			You do know there is golf on the telly don't you.
		
Click to expand...



My lappie on my lap, in the parlour with TV on, beer in hand.

multi tasking dear boy, multi tasking.


----------



## Val (Apr 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Val, who else would there be?
Labour is bound to make a comeback but I think it may be a few years and a change of leadership before they overtake the SNP.
The other parties are dead in the water with the exception of the Greens.
		
Click to expand...

My point is not a winning party but a majority, only a majority can ensure their own policies and decisions get through. It was close last time out.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 14, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:





My lappie on my lap, in the parlour with TV on, beer in hand.

multi tasking dear boy, multi tasking.
		
Click to expand...

You have a parlour, how posh, surprised your are not a Tory!


----------



## williamalex1 (Apr 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You have a parlour, how posh, surprised your are not a Tory!
		
Click to expand...

Reminds me of the spider speaking to the fly


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 14, 2014)

On Salmond's conference speech - I heard more than once radio/TV presenters (always English - I am sorry but true) on UK-wide broadcasts/programmes asking if Salmond not now getting desperate in seeking cross-party support for a YES vote as if this was a new tactic - clearly not really appreciating that the YES campaign has been cross-party from the outset.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 14, 2014)

The SNP and SLP are natural bedsharers.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 15, 2014)

Angus Robertson's comments at the end make interesting reading.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27030447


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 15, 2014)

This news on military, combined with the news that Scottish independence will result in more starving children in Africa/India has made me scratch my head and wonder if they could possibly come up with anything + about the union, as opposed to scare mongery.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This news on military, combined with the news that Scottish independence will result in more starving children in Africa/India has made me scratch my head and wonder if they could possibly come up with anything + about the union, as opposed to scare mongery.
		
Click to expand...

I think they are really struggling to make their case.

In general, if the status quo is considered "great" and the changed situation not quite as good it's difficult to express that without sounding negative. However, professional politicians should be able to manage it.

I haven't seen this nonsense about more starving children, who's saying that?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I think they are really struggling to make their case.

In general, if the status quo is considered "great" and the changed situation not quite as good it's difficult to express that without sounding negative. However, professional politicians should be able to manage it.

I haven't seen this nonsense about more starving children, who's saying that?
		
Click to expand...

Justine Greening, cabinet member.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...3375293?WT.mc_id=Outbrain_text&obref=obinsite

So, to recap:

There would be more starving people in the world
It would be a 'catacylsmic' event and beneficial to 'the forces of darkness'
We would have no currency
The oil is running out
Reduced as a world power
No NATO/EU/UN membership
internationally isolated
We couldn't afford the set up costs
etc 
etc

So, lots of reasons to worry about, but nothing positive?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Justine Greening, cabinet member.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...3375293?WT.mc_id=Outbrain_text&obref=obinsite

So, to recap:

There would be more starving people in the world
It would be a 'catacylsmic' event and beneficial to 'the forces of darkness'
We would have no currency
The oil is running out
Reduced as a world power
No NATO/EU/UN membership
internationally isolated
We couldn't afford the set up costs
etc 
etc

So, lots of reasons to worry about, but nothing positive?
		
Click to expand...



I think some of the arguments characterised as "negative" have a basis in truth, or at least possibility since much of the debate (on both sides) is speculation. (Some others are, indeed, nonsense)

However, this is a new low and quite depressing.


----------



## CMAC (Apr 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Justine Greening, cabinet member.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...3375293?WT.mc_id=Outbrain_text&obref=obinsite

So, to recap:

*There would be more starving people in the world
It would be a 'catacylsmic' event and beneficial to 'the forces of darkness'*
We would have no currency
The oil is running out
Reduced as a world power
No NATO/EU/UN membership
internationally isolated
We couldn't afford the set up costs
etc 
etc

So, lots of reasons to worry about, but nothing positive?
		
Click to expand...

cant see where it says that in the link


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 15, 2014)

CMAC said:



			cant see where it says that in the link
		
Click to expand...

Quite clear that what she says about splitting UK aid contribution - she claims it would have a negative impact on the poorest countries.  Nice one Justine.  So Self-determination isn;t just based upon self - countries have to consider the global impact of their self-determination. 

Oh well.  So that's Scotland's YES voters not only having to worry about the security of the world but also world poverty - cool for a country of 5mil  - what's the rest of the world doing?


----------



## CMAC (Apr 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



*Quite clear that what she says about splitting UK aid contribution - she claims it would have a negative impact on the poorest countries.*  Nice one Justine.  So Self-determination isn;t just based upon self - countries have to consider the global impact of their self-determination. 

Oh well.  So that's Scotland's YES voters not only having to worry about the security of the world but also world poverty - cool for a country of 5mil  - what's the rest of the world doing?
		
Click to expand...

yes but it doesnt say they'll be more starving people in the world. Less money to any aid/charity will have a negative impact.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 15, 2014)

They are sounding more and more desperate now.

She actually says that 'splitting the aid in two'. No Justine it is splitting the aid 90%/10%.
Where do they get these numties from.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 15, 2014)

CMAC said:



			yes but it doesnt say they'll be more starving people in the world. Less money to any aid/charity will have a negative impact.
		
Click to expand...

If UK aid helps lift poorest people out of a starvation existence then one of the effects of reducing the aid and the impact would be fewer lifted out of that existence.  It's pretty desperate stuff Ms Greening.  

That said it is good to hear the UK government starting to speak up rather than hide behind the BT campaign.  Though where that leaves Cameron's insistent assertion of not that many weeks ago that it is up to BT to make the case for a NO vote I am not sure.  

Actually BT and now Westminster aren't yet explaining the virtues and benefits of the status quo and indeed telling us what the status quo will look like in a few years time - making a case for a NO vote.  Indeed they are still simply making a case for unYES - though I think that by now we all now understand all they tell us might happen if YES.


----------



## CMAC (Apr 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They are sounding more and more desperate now.

She actually says that 'splitting the aid in two'. No Justine it is splitting the aid 90%/10%.
Where do they get these numties from.
		
Click to expand...

thats one person, the desperate cases are very firmly within the yes camp, that is unquestioning.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Apr 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They are sounding more and more desperate now.

She actually says that 'splitting the aid in two'. No Justine it is splitting the aid 90%/10%.
Where do they get these numties from.
		
Click to expand...

You know that any split of something makes it into two? It doesn't mean 50/50, just means that where before it was one whole thing, now it is two parts. Whether those parts are 50/50, 90/10, 99/1 etc, still splitting in two. 

If she had said halved, then I would agree with you. All about politician speak.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 15, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			You know that any split of something makes it into two? It doesn't mean 50/50, just means that where before it was one whole thing, now it is two parts. Whether those parts are 50/50, 90/10, 99/1 etc, still splitting in two. 

If she had said halved, then I would agree with you. All about politician speak.
		
Click to expand...

When you say you are going to split something in two most will invariably take that as it being halved or thereabouts. So by saying this she's implying a big cut and impact in the event of Scotland leaving UK.


----------



## CMAC (Apr 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			When you say you are going to split something in two most will invariably take that as it being halved or thereabouts. So by saying this she's implying a big cut and impact in the event of Scotland leaving UK.
		
Click to expand...

And that is the crux IMO of the yes campaign, assumption! And you know what that means


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 15, 2014)

CMAC said:



			And that is the crux IMO of the yes campaign, assumption! And you know what that means 

Click to expand...

The only thing in life that isn't an assumption is life,death and taxes.ANYTHING Better Together or Yes say is an assumption.We're told x/y/z will happen by either side, whether good or bad, predictions are made, one proclaiming a + outlook, one -.


----------



## Val (Apr 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This news on military, combined with the news that Scottish independence will result in more starving children in Africa/India has made me scratch my head and *wonder if they could possibly come up with anything + about the union,* as opposed to scare mongery.
		
Click to expand...

They don't have to, people know what we have with the union currently. The more negative they make an independent Scotland look the more positive a union becomes to the eye.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The only thing in life that isn't an assumption is life,death and taxes.ANYTHING Better Together or Yes say is an assumption.We're told x/y/z will happen by either side, whether good or bad, predictions are made, one proclaiming a + outlook, one -.
		
Click to expand...

As in the assumption bandied about by BT that in the event of a NO vote then the status quo will remain beyond the announcement of the result - i.e. vote NO and nothing will change.  Of course that includes the ACTUAL (not assumed) cuts in spending lined up for us all in the UK; the risk of UK leaving the EU; the risk of changes to the Barnett formula further reducing per head funding in Scotland; and the risk of a Tory/UKIP coalition forming the next Westminster government (oh joys unbounded).


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			We're told x/y/z will happen by either side, whether good or bad, predictions are made, one proclaiming a + outlook, one -.
		
Click to expand...

And we know that neither side are giving all the facts so why is it that the Yes guys on here only point the finger at one side.  Nothing balanced about the argument.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			They don't have to, people know what we have with the union currently. The more negative they make an independent Scotland look the more positive a union becomes to the eye.
		
Click to expand...

Yes they might know what they have today - but what about tomorrow.  So yes they DO have to give some vision for Scotland - and that means looking forward not simply to today.


----------



## Val (Apr 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			As in the assumption bandied about by BT that in the event of a NO vote then the status quo will remain beyond the announcement of the result - i.e. vote NO and nothing will change.  Of course that includes the ACTUAL (not assumed) cuts in spending lined up for us all in the UK; the risk of UK leaving the EU; the risk of changes to the Barnett formula further reducing per head funding in Scotland; and the risk of a Tory/UKIP coalition forming the next Westminster government (oh joys unbounded).
		
Click to expand...

Not really sure what you are trying to say here, the only actual (not assumed) statement you say here is as follows




			that in the event of a NO vote then the status quo will remain beyond the announcement of the result - i.e. vote NO and nothing will change.
		
Click to expand...

That is a given until someone from the government says otherwise.

The risks you talk about are exactly that, risk. Not concrete or guaranteed, just a risk. It's a risk driving a car every day but it doesn't stop me driving to work.


----------



## Val (Apr 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes they might know what they have today - but what about tomorrow.  So yes they DO have to give some vision for Scotland - and that means looking forward not simply to today.
		
Click to expand...

But they are looking forward, they are looking at the negatives of a yes vote and the impact that has on Scotland as a nation. That is also forward thinking.


----------



## Val (Apr 15, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			And we know that neither side are giving all the facts *so why is it that the Yes guys on here only point the finger at one side.  Nothing balanced about the argument*.
		
Click to expand...

It's not just on here, it's in general.

Well spotted :thup:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			But they are looking forward, they are looking at the negatives of a yes vote and the impact that has on Scotland as a nation. That is also forward thinking.
		
Click to expand...

It is forward thinking, but predicting outcomes following a YES vote doesn't tell anyone anything about the future of Scotland in UK eyes following a NO vote. 

And so the 'uncertain's will be in the ballot box on Sept 18th and many will be thinking they don't really know what YES will actually be like, but aren't really at all keen on the 'status quo' and how things have been over the last decades.  

So do you vote NO knowing that if you don't like the outcome you know that only have yourself to blame and you can't complain - after all you weren't actually promised anything new or different if you voted NO. 

Or do you vote YES - and if things don't go as hoped and promised you know that you can take it out on your elected representatives in Holyrood who got you in the mess.  

Who knows.  But by not giving a vision for the future of Scotland following a NO, BT/Westminster are taking a big gamble I think.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 15, 2014)

Will things not stay the same after a No vote ? 

The UK as it is are under no obligation at all to change anything if a No vote happens.

If they are not saying anything does that not suggest there is going to be no changes - so people voting no know what they will get - the same as now 

It's the only vote at the moment that carries any guarantees with it.


----------



## Imurg (Apr 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Or do you vote YES - and if things don't go as hoped and promised you know that you can take it out on your elected representatives in Holyrood who got you in the mess.
		
Click to expand...

And how is that going to help a screwed Scotland?
If there is a Yes vote and it all goes to rat-poo in Scotland, yes they can take it out on whoever is in charge - but they're still screwed...there's no way back.


----------



## Val (Apr 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It is forward thinking, but predicting outcomes following a YES vote doesn't tell anyone anything about the future of Scotland in UK eyes following a NO vote.
		
Click to expand...

Who says it has to, what has to change in the event of a NO. Completely understand your sentiment but I see exactly what the BT campaign are trying to do to the YES campaign, at every chance they will undermine their visions and the more doubt they will sow into the voters mind the more the voters doubt then the less they are likely to vote for change. That is their obvious strategy IMO.

For some reason people seem to think there has to be this big laid out plan for the future of Scotland post a NO vote from the BT campaign, whats there to plan? We know what it is like as part of the union currently therefore post NO we know the likely future.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			For some reason people seem to think there has to be this big laid out plan for the future of Scotland post a NO vote from the BT campaign, whats there to plan? We know what it is like as part of the union currently therefore post NO we know the likely future.
		
Click to expand...

Nothing HAS to change - but what will?

We are talking about the future of the country - not just something that the electorate can change after 5 yrs if they don't like it.  YES are trying to set out a vision and a plan - BT aren't.

All I am saying here is that BT simply offering undecideds 'more of the same' is risky when many undecideds won't like what they've had over the last years and decades.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Nothing HAS to change - but what will?

We are talking about the future of the country - not just something that the electorate can change after 5 yrs if they don't like it.  YES are trying to set out a vision and a plan - BT aren't.

All I am saying here is that BT simply offering undecideds 'more of the same' is risky when many undecideds won't like what they've had over the last years and decades.
		
Click to expand...

Well how about you take it that nothing will change because it's not the rest of the UK that wants change - if No wins then we carry on until the next election 

How about many undecideds actually are ok with what's going so will when it comes to the crunch could vote no


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 15, 2014)

Imurg said:



			And how is that going to help a screwed Scotland?
If there is a Yes vote and it all goes to rat-poo in Scotland, yes they can take it out on whoever is in charge - but they're still screwed...there's no way back.
		
Click to expand...

That rather implies they'll screw it up! Or it will somehow get screwed!

It strikes me that they are no more likely and probably less likely to screw up their own country. and if they do so, the people are able to get rid of them far easier, something that's impossible currently. 

And they are probably in at least as good a position as rUK to withstand the likes of the inevitable energy shock that is coming up in the next 5 years!

There are enough example of Scotland size economies that are known to work all around the Globe, so there's no need to consider failure. It's really just a case of whether the Scottish people actually want to split.

There will be some significant overheads though, both in terms of size of Government/Civil service and more complexity for Business, but that won't force Companies to move from Scotland imo. If they deal with Scotland, the complexities will still be there, even if they are not based in Scotland.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 15, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			And we know that neither side are giving all the facts so why is it that the Yes guys on here only point the finger at one side.  Nothing balanced about the argument.
		
Click to expand...

In all honesty I do not think there are many if any YES guy on here.

There are three or four looking for a balanced debate and trying to right the many 'natural' assumptions from the non voting NO guys constantly give out.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In all honesty I do not think there are many if any YES guy on here.

There are three or four looking for a balanced debate and trying to right the many 'natural' assumptions from the non voting NO guys constantly give out.
		
Click to expand...

What about the natural assumptions that you see from the YES voters ? Or do they not appear ? 

Haven't seen much "balance" from people who it's clear want a Yes vote


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Who knows.  But by not giving a vision for the future of Scotland following a NO, BT/Westminster are taking a big gamble I think.
		
Click to expand...

Equally the Yes vote are not giving a vision of the future so snap.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 15, 2014)

In the end it will boil down to, 'what system do you trust the most to look after the interests of Scotland's children'.

The NO guys have been losing that debate for quite a few years. That is why the SNP have risen to power.
The SNP have also delivered decent policies and budgets. They are more akin to the way Scots think.


----------



## Val (Apr 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In the end it will boil down to, 'what system do you trust the most to look after the interests of Scotland's children'.

The NO guys have been losing that debate for quite a few years. That is why the SNP have risen to power.
The SNP have also delivered decent policies and budgets. They are more akin to the way Scots.
		
Click to expand...

But that doesn't mean the Scottish people want independence.


----------



## Val (Apr 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Nothing HAS to change - but what will?

We are talking about the future of the country - not just something that the electorate can change after 5 yrs if they don't like it.  YES are trying to set out a vision and a plan - BT aren't.

All I am saying here is that BT simply offering undecideds 'more of the same' is risky when many undecideds won't like what they've had over the last years and decades.
		
Click to expand...

No one knows if anything will, what is certain right now is nothing will because as far as I'm led to believe no one has said there will be change post NO


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			But that doesn't mean the Scottish people want independence.
		
Click to expand...

That's right Val, I have been pretty impressed with the way the SNP have managed Scotland in the last few years.
At the start I have favoured Devo Max but that now seems to be a fudge and will not solve the wishes of many Scots.

What this debate has proved to me is that Scotland have not been getting the massive handouts from Westminster that many folk thought. Non Scots thought that there was no way we could manage either alone or within the UK without the Westminster subsidy.

There are quite a few SNP voters who do not want to see the breakup of the Union. There are also Labour and Tory supporters who will vote for an independent Scotland.

If the No vote wins I hope that the rUK will be aware of our ability to stand on our own feet and show us some more respect.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If the No vote wins I hope that the rUK will be aware of our ability to stand on our own feet and show us some more respect.
		
Click to expand...

In what way do you feel that the people of Scotland get no respect, and I don't mean in a political way but by the folk of UK.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 15, 2014)

I'm afraid that you only need to go back to some earlier posts on this thread to see that.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That's right Val, I have been pretty impressed with the way the SNP have managed Scotland in the last few years.
At the start I have favoured Devo Max but that now seems to be a fudge and will not solve the wishes of many Scots.

What this debate has proved to me is that Scotland have not been getting the massive handouts from Westminster that many folk thought. Non Scots thought that there was no way we could manage either alone or within the UK without the Westminster subsidy.

There are quite a few SNP voters who do not want to see the breakup of the Union. There are also Labour and Tory supporters who will vote for an independent Scotland.

If the No vote wins I hope that the rUK will be aware of our ability to stand on our own feet and *show us some more respect*.
		
Click to expand...

Thats very much a two way street


----------



## Val (Apr 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Thats very much a two way street
		
Click to expand...

Care to elaborate on that Phil?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Care to elaborate on that Phil?
		
Click to expand...

Respect is very much a two way street Val


----------



## Val (Apr 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Respect is very much a two way street Val
		
Click to expand...

I'm aware of that, so what lack of respect are the Scottish people showing?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I'm aware of that, so what lack of respect are the Scottish people showing?
		
Click to expand...

Depends what sort of people are we talking 

Scottish people as whole - i cant say - people i have met and worked with - no lack of respect 

Some posts on here - plenty - certainly ones aimed towards "South East England"

Do Scotland respect England ? You guys live there to be able to tell me 

I certainly respect the Scottish people i have met 

But can you say with 100% assurance that the whole of Scotland respects England/Rest of Uk 

Just as i cant say with 100% assurance that the whole of England/UK respect Scotland

As i said a while ago - until i came on this site i have never witness such "nastiness" between England and Scotland - worked with many people from Scotland and have had the banter with them - i was utterly astounded to be told its racist because i called someone a Jock.

I just hope that the general undertone of this thread isnt a picture of the whole of the country


----------



## Val (Apr 15, 2014)

It's how you use the term Jock but let's not go there, there was no amount of explaining the last time could convince you so best let lie.

In terms of respect, I'm sure DFT comment is aimed at Westminster not English people.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It's how you use the term Jock but let's not go there, there was no amount of explaining the last time could convince you so best let lie.

In terms of respect, I'm sure DFT comment is aimed at Westminster not English people.
		
Click to expand...

Does Westminster not respect the Scottish people then ?


----------



## Val (Apr 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Does Westminster not respect the Scottish people then ?
		
Click to expand...

IMO, not on the way it should for the many many reasons highlighted on this thread. Was giving us the poll tax a year before everyone else respect to name an obvious example.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 15, 2014)

I dont know anyone in England that thinks they would be better off with Scotland out of the UK or for that have a real dislike for the Scots.   I get the definite vibe there are a fair number of Scots that have a certain dislike or even hatred for the 'English' and it is the 'English' rather than the rUK.  I can only hazard a guess this is historic and looking to past conflicts. 

Shame really, a little banter and mick taking is one thing but it's a shame if our Nations separate because people cant let go of  the past.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It's how you use the term Jock but let's not go there, there was no amount of explaining the last time could convince you so best let lie.

In terms of respect, I'm sure DFT comment is aimed at Westminster not English people.
		
Click to expand...

Correct, I said rUK not England.
Phil and SR were the ones who specifically mentioned England


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Correct, I said rUK not England.
Phil and SR were the ones who specifically mentioned England
		
Click to expand...

The anti english undercurrent to your posts that eminates from you is as clear as day :thup:


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Correct, I said rUK not England.
Phil and SR were the ones who specifically mentioned England
		
Click to expand...

You know well that you are not referring to Welsh or Irish in your critiques.  Man up to your convictions.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 16, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The anti english undercurrent to your posts that eminates from you is as clear as day :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Says the man who calls us 'Jocks'.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Says the man who calls us 'Jocks'.
		
Click to expand...

Yep - a nickname commonly used in the forces to describe people from Scotland and meant with zero malice and all about banter - same when the Irish are called Paddy and the Welsh are called Taffs.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 16, 2014)

Interesting, a minority of the Scots in the Islands feel they should become Independent. Is this the start of the break up of Scotland. Will an iscot assist in setting up a referendum.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 16, 2014)

The worlds gone mad. Human rights to a level of stupidity for terrorists and people running into the corner for a weep because their called Taff, paddy and jock.
I wish I had a Â£ for every time I had been called Brit scum by members of the UK. Some people are just so precious.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			The worlds gone mad. Human rights to a level of stupidity for terrorists and people running into the corner for a weep because their called Taff, paddy and jock.
I wish I had a Â£ for every time I had been called Brit scum by members of the UK. Some people are just so precious.
		
Click to expand...

Are you implying that the Scots, Irish and Welsh are terrorists now?


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 16, 2014)

The previous two Prime Ministers were Scottish. 
The make up of the previous cabinets had a healthy dose of Scottish Ministers.
The Govt. spending per head is only greater in Northern Ireland.

And you think Westminster is anti-Scottish? There are two very different political parties in power, north and south of the Border, and I can understand them not getting on but I don't see separate UK laws being applied to different countries. The chip on some shoulders, about perceived unfairness and lack of respect, is laughable. 

Can Scotland stand on its own two feet? Of course it can, and would probably do a damn good job of it too. But if you want independance, be_ independant_. There's too much cake and eat it being bandied about. - you want independance but want the pound, and you'll trade Faslane to keep the pound. Be brave if you want independance, and do your own thing.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			The worlds gone mad. Human rights to a level of stupidity for terrorists and people running into the corner for a weep because their called Taff, paddy and jock.
I wish I had a Â£ for every time I had been called Brit scum by members of the UK. Some people are just so precious.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting you decide to use terrorist and Scots/Welsh/Irish as the same comparisons in the same sentence, and Scottish residents are being accused of showing a lack of respect.

yours,

A.Precious


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Interesting you decide to use terrorist and Scots/Welsh/Irish as the same comparisons in the same sentence, and Scottish residents are being accused of showing a lack of respect.

yours,

A.Precious
		
Click to expand...

There you go again putting words peoples mouths.   You know well that he was not suggesting Scotts are terrorists!!


----------



## Val (Apr 16, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Yep - a nickname commonly used in the forces to describe people from Scotland and meant with zero malice and all about banter - same when the Irish are called Paddy and the Welsh are called Taffs.
		
Click to expand...

Not everyone here is or has been in the forces so you shouldn't assume it's acceptable everywhere.

As was already highlighted a long time ago, people accept this from people they tend to know and others (like me) don't tend to like it from strangers.

Again, this debate goes round in circles, no-one will agree so it's best being dropped


----------



## Val (Apr 16, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			The previous two Prime Ministers were Scottish. 
The make up of the previous cabinets had a healthy dose of Scottish Ministers.
The Govt. spending per head is only greater in Northern Ireland.

And you think Westminster is anti-Scottish? There are two very different political parties in power, north and south of the Border, and I can understand them not getting on but I don't see separate UK laws being applied to different countries. The chip on some shoulders, about perceived unfairness and lack of respect, is laughable. 

Can Scotland stand on its own two feet? Of course it can, and would probably do a damn good job of it too. But if you want independance, be_ independant_. There's too much cake and eat it being bandied about. - you want independance but want the pound, and you'll trade Faslane to keep the pound. Be brave if you want independance, and do your own thing.
		
Click to expand...

Good post :thup:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 16, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			The previous two Prime Ministers were Scottish. 
The make up of the previous cabinets had a healthy dose of Scottish Ministers.
*The Govt. spending per head is only greater in Northern Ireland.*

And you think Westminster is anti-Scottish? There are two very different political parties in power, north and south of the Border, and I can understand them not getting on but I don't see separate UK laws being applied to different countries. The chip on some shoulders, about perceived unfairness and lack of respect, is laughable. 

Can Scotland stand on its own two feet? Of course it can, and would probably do a damn good job of it too. But if you want independance, be_ independant_. There's too much cake and eat it being bandied about. - you want independance but want the pound, and you'll trade Faslane to keep the pound. Be brave if you want independance, and do your own thing.
		
Click to expand...

And rightly so, given we contribute more than pretty much everyone else.

But I do agree with this, I'd dump Falsane,The Â£,Euro and NATO.



SocketRocket said:



			There you go again putting words peoples mouths.   You know well that he was not suggesting Scotts are terrorists!!
		
Click to expand...

Would appear I'm not the only one to draw the conclusion, but we'll never know what he meant in truth.

it's one 't' in Scot btw.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Are you implying that the Scots, Irish and Welsh are terrorists now?
		
Click to expand...

Are you really that silly


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Would appear I'm not the only one to draw the conclusion, but we'll never know what he meant in truth.

it's one 't' in Scot btw.
		
Click to expand...

I would hate to bully you into thinking anything else however I am beginning to think there just might be 2 t's in Scot.

PS: Once again I will own up to not being English.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In all honesty I do not think there are many if any YES guy on here.

There are three or four looking for a balanced debate and trying to right the many 'natural' assumptions from the non voting NO guys constantly give out.
		
Click to expand...

I'm trying to be one of these.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Equally the Yes vote are not giving a vision of the future so snap.
		
Click to expand...

What makes you say that?  Of course the YES campaign is giving a vision.  It may be filled with uncertainty but at least it's a vision.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Are you really that silly
		
Click to expand...

Well, I think there's been a bit of trouble in Ireland. And a few 'second homes' have been burnt down in Wales.

Does the havoc wreaked by Blair and Broon count?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 16, 2014)

Valentino said:



			No one knows if anything will, what is certain right now is nothing will because as far as I'm led to believe no one has said there will be change post NO
		
Click to expand...

And no-one has said that there won't be.  So other than staying in the UK what are you voting for if you vote NO.  Again - all I'm saying on this is that BT are not giving Scots any vision for the future.


----------



## CMAC (Apr 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And no-one has said that there won't be.  So other than staying in the UK what are you voting for if you vote NO.  Again - all I'm saying on this is that BT are not giving Scots any vision for the future.
		
Click to expand...

You seriously posted that! You don't know what what someone voting NO is voting for?

Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 16, 2014)

CMAC said:



			You seriously posted that! You don't know what what someone voting NO is voting for?

Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse?
		
Click to expand...

No I'm not - voting NO is clearly voting to stay in the UK and for the status quo.  Tell me what else voting NO brings then>

Thing is I'm not hearing from BT any vision for a future Scotland in the UK when maybe some undecided voters might *like *a bit of vision from BT - because they don't really like the status quo.  

If I am wrong tell me what BT have in mind for Scotland in the future - other than more of the same.  And with that I think BT are running a risk with the undecideds.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			And rightly so, given we contribute more than pretty much everyone else.

But I do agree with this, I'd dump Falsane,The Â£,Euro and NATO.


.
		
Click to expand...

But you're not contributing more The City of London, financial district, contributes not far short of the revenue that's seen from oil.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 16, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			But you're not contributing more The City of London, financial district, contributes not far short of the revenue that's seen from oil.
		
Click to expand...

It's Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics again! 

Check out the vid that Adi posted and you'll see why - and it's in those ONS figures too!


----------



## CMAC (Apr 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No I'm not - voting NO is clearly voting to stay in the UK and for the status quo.  Tell me what else voting NO brings then>

Thing is I'm not hearing from BT any vision for a future Scotland in the UK when maybe some undecided voters might *like *a bit of vision from BT - because they don't really like the status quo.  

If I am wrong tell me what BT have in mind for Scotland in the future - other than more of the same.  And with that I think BT are running a risk with the undecideds.
		
Click to expand...

Why does it have to bring anything apart from "NO I don't want to separate from the Union"

Your looking for agendas that possibly aren't there.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I would hate to bully you into thinking anything else however I am beginning to think there just might be 2 t's in Scot.

PS: Once again I will own up to not being English.
		
Click to expand...

I think you alluded to the fact you were born in Scotland previously?

Anyway, onwards.

Did anyone happen to see the last nights referendum debate on BBC2?Again, I thought they did a pretty good job, and the guy who chairs these debates is the best I've seen from any station, James Cook is the guy, reckon he's working his way to being The BBCs main man this year.

couple of points...I think Lesley Riddoch is terrific, she should get back into politics.I think Brian Wilson ( for all I disagree with him on nuclear power stations and his football team) is precisely what I'd want from iScotland Labour, the guy is decent and his work on land ownership in particular is good.Carmichael was probably on his best behaviour,considering it was his constituency, and only made one ricket, so pretty impressive for him.Thought the SNP Constance was a wee bit light weight, too much smiling for me.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 16, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Why does it have to bring anything apart from "NO I don't want to separate from the Union"

Your looking for agendas that possibly aren't there.
		
Click to expand...

It doesn't - but I think it is running a risk by not doing so.  You seem to be ignoring the fact that for a century there has been an underlying yearning among some/many Scots for going it alone.  And there will be many who whilst not promoting or supporting independence might have had at the back of their minds - maybe one day - but not at the moment.

And I think it is the votes of these people that BT is risking losing to the YES campaign.  Because 18th Sept is the date they can decide one way or another.  So if they are in the 'not now maybe another time' camp - then they might realise that if 'not now' then another time might not come.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I think you alluded to the fact you were born in Scotland previously?

Anyway, onwards.
		
Click to expand...

No I didn't but the majority of your post indicate you only read and agree with the bits that suit you.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 16, 2014)

So SLH do you suggest that Westminister offer the people of Scotland a bribe to stay in the UK. I'm sure the rest of us would love that.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 16, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			But you're not contributing more The City of London, financial district, contributes not far short of the revenue that's seen from oil.
		
Click to expand...

City of London institutions may move to Nigeria in 5 years time if they get better deals.
Oil is there for 50 years.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			No I didn't but the majority of your post indicate you only read and agree with the bits that suit you.
		
Click to expand...

Calm down dear, you'll need to change your Tena if you keep getting this upset,.It was a genuine mistake, I was sure you had previously said you were born in Scotland.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Calm down dear, you'll need to change your Tena if you keep getting this upset,.It was a genuine mistake, I was sure you had previously said you were born in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Always been calm which according to HID is one of my annoying features.  I'm sure I have a couple more.

I was born in Jamaica but I am Welsh with a preference to be considered British but in the end people can call me what they want.

Now, would you support independence for the Islands of Scotland.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Now, would you support independence for the Islands of Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Theoretically, yes.But I do realise there has to be a point at which demands for independence stops...Leith from Edinburgh is my own personal crusade.But I do think there is a strong feeling that Orkney/Shetland and maybe to a lesser degree The Outer Hebrides feel as disenfranchised from Edinburgh as London.


----------



## CMAC (Apr 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It doesn't - but I think it is running a risk by not doing so.  *You seem to be ignoring the fact that for a century there has been an underlying yearning among some/many Scots for going it alone. * And there will be many who whilst not promoting or supporting independence might have had at the back of their minds - maybe one day - but not at the moment.

And I think it is the votes of these people that BT is risking losing to the YES campaign.  Because 18th Sept is the date they can decide one way or another.  So if they are in the 'not now maybe another time' camp - then they might realise that if 'not now' then another time might not come.
		
Click to expand...

I'm ignoring it because it's hearsay.


----------



## Val (Apr 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And no-one has said that there won't be.  So other than staying in the UK what are you voting for if you vote NO.  Again - all I'm saying on this is that BT are not giving Scots any vision for the future.
		
Click to expand...

Ok let me give another scenario as I don't think I'm clear enough.

The local bank opens at 9 but there is a local committee asking people to vote on it opening at 10, what happens if they don't win the vote?

The answer it is that it opens at 9. No one has said it will change if no one vote the 10 through.

This is exactly the same, no one has said there WILL be change in the event of a no therefore no one HAS to say there won't be change.


----------



## Val (Apr 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No I'm not - voting NO is clearly voting to stay in the UK and for the status quo.  Tell me what else voting NO brings then>

Thing is I'm not hearing from BT any vision for a future Scotland in the UK when maybe some undecided voters might *like *a bit of vision from BT - because they don't really like the status quo.  

If I am wrong tell me what BT have in mind for Scotland in the future - other than more of the same.  And with that I think BT are running a risk with the undecideds.
		
Click to expand...

I've said this already, we know what Scotland is like now, all BT have to do is point out how much worse it will be post YES, that is their vision currently as far as I see it.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Theoretically, yes.But I do realise there has to be a point at which demands for independence stops...*Leith from Edinburgh is my own personal crusade*.But I do think there is a strong feeling that Orkney/Shetland and maybe to a lesser degree The Outer Hebrides feel as disenfranchised from Edinburgh as London.
		
Click to expand...

That's about as likely (or sensible imo) as Stockbridge, or any other suburb, from Edinburgh these days!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 16, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			That's about as likely (or sensible imo) as Stockbridge, or any other suburb, from Edinburgh these days!
		
Click to expand...

It was a (slightly) tongue in cheek remark about how micro do things go before it gets silly.But point of order re:Leith and _any other suburb_
Leith certainly is different to any other area of Edinburgh, and given brutal way the area is treated by the council, unlike any other area, my antipathy towards Edinburgh council is significant.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It was a (slightly) tongue in cheek remark about how micro do things go before it gets silly.But point of order re:Leith and _any other suburb_
Leith certainly is different to any other area of Edinburgh, and given brutal way the area is treated by the council, unlike any other area, my antipathy towards Edinburgh council is significant.
		
Click to expand...

It must be a rough deal indeed if Leith gets treated any worse by the council than the rest of us. Incompetents, every one!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			So SLH do you suggest that Westminister offer the people of Scotland a bribe to stay in the UK. I'm sure the rest of us would love that.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting that at all.  All I want to hear is something that says 'we have told you all the reasons you shouldn't vote YES - so in addition to that here is what we see as being the *benefits *for Scotland voting to stay in the Union'

Or are there no benefits?  Well of course there are benefits - so let's hear BT tell us of them.  Do BT think that in time Scotland will be able to have 'devo max'?  Would almost certainly be a sure way of completely killing off the risk of a YES.  Is that a bribe?  

If BT can't or won't offer more than the status quo then I think they are running a risk with the undecideds.  I would have thought that to be self-evident.  You are right I am sure that many undecideds will be happy with the status quo - even although they might not like it - it being preferable to life under a YES.  But there I am also convinced that there will be some who will not be so sure,

See also Matthew Norman piece in Independant today
_*
England should beg Scotland to stay*_


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'm not suggesting that at all.  All I want to hear is something that says 'we have told you all the reasons you shouldn't vote YES - so in addition to that here is what we see as being the *benefits *for Scotland voting to stay in the Union'

Or are there no benefits?  Well of course there are benefits - so let's hear BT tell us of them.  Do BT think that in time Scotland will be able to have 'devo max'?  Would almost certainly be a sure way of completely killing off the risk of a YES.  Is that a bribe?  

If BT can't or won't offer more than the status quo then I think they are running a risk with the undecideds.  I would have thought that to be self-evident.  You are right I am sure that many undecideds will be happy with the status quo - even although they might not like it - it being preferable to life under a YES.  But there I am also convinced that there will be some who will not be so sure,
		
Click to expand...

I think the very fact that there won't be a cataclysmic meltdown of western civilisation is a benefit..........


----------



## CMAC (Apr 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'm not suggesting that at all.  All I want to hear is something that says 'we have told you all the reasons you shouldn't vote YES - so in addition to that here is what we see as being the *benefits *for Scotland voting to stay in the Union'

Or are there no benefits?  Well of course there are benefits - so let's hear BT tell us of them.  Do BT think that in time Scotland will be able to have 'devo max'?  Would almost certainly be a sure way of completely killing off the risk of a YES.  Is that a bribe?  

If BT can't or won't offer more than the status quo then I think they are running a risk with the undecideds.  I would have thought that to be self-evident.  You are right I am sure that many undecideds will be happy with the status quo - even although they might not like it - it being preferable to life under a YES.  But there I am also convinced that there will be some who will not be so sure,
		
Click to expand...

Please have a day off! This is getting tedious.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 16, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Please have a day off! This is getting tedious.
		
Click to expand...

I am not talking for me - I don;t'get a vote.  I am simply pointing out that I think it stupid for BT to rely on the status quo and fear to ensure a NO


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 16, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It must be a rough deal indeed if Leith gets treated any worse by the council than the rest of us. Incompetents, every one!
		
Click to expand...

I think it does.

The Tram (singular) meant to come down to Leith, now stops at Picardy Place...but not before Leith Walk is virtually closed for over a year,closing business and stopping folk habitually driving down Leith Walk.The Walk hasn't recovered and probably won't.

LeithWaterWorld, closed by the council.A Collective of local parents/business owners got together and made an offer to council to operate it at not-for-profit...council declined,sold it to a soft play company, who in turn will under cut the locally ran soft plays, closing them too!

The old railway offices on Duke Street/Leith Walk-currently being turned into a homeless/addict refuge, on top of the constant use of B&Bs on the links to house junkies, doing zero for the area trying to move away from that blight.

Tell me another area of the city treated to badly?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I think it does.

The Tram (singular) meant to come down to Leith, now stops at Picardy Place...but not before Leith Walk is virtually closed for over a year,closing business and stopping folk habitually driving down Leith Walk.The Walk hasn't recovered and probably won't.

LeithWaterWorld, closed by the council.A Collective of local parents/business owners got together and made an offer to council to operate it at not-for-profit...council declined,sold it to a soft play company, who in turn will under cut the locally ran soft plays, closing them too!

The old railway offices on Duke Street/Leith Walk-currently being turned into a homeless/addict refuge, on top of the constant use of B&Bs on the links to house junkies, doing zero for the area trying to move away from that blight.

Tell me another area of the city treated to badly?
		
Click to expand...

I wasn't arguing, just pointing out that Edinburgh council are the most useless shower of halfwits ever to walk the planet. Trams, congestion charge, residents parking, statutory notices etc etc etc

I live between Leith Walk / Easter Road so aware of much of what you say....


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



_*
England should beg Scotland to stay*_

Click to expand...

And there lies the problem, everybody just refers to England when the whole thing involves the whole of UK and even includes all those Englander hating Scots living in England.

Plus bribing Scotland would be political suicide and the SNP know that.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			And there lies the problem, everybody just refers to England when the whole thing involves the whole of UK and even includes all those Englander hating Scots living in England.

Plus bribing Scotland would be political suicide and the SNP know that.
		
Click to expand...

Well since most here seem to think that the BT and Westminster strategy for the referendum is doing just fine - here's what the Indy columnist opens with:

_In the entire global history of the political campaign, has any been more misconceived, wretchedly executed and potentially self-defeating than the one designed to keep Scotland within the United Kingdom?_

Seems then that I am not the only one who thinks BT are playing with fire


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 16, 2014)

Here's a link to a lengthy pdf from a very good source, non political, but long.

http://www.royalsoced.org.uk/cms/files/events/reports/2013-2014/The Book.pdf


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well since most here seem to think that the BT and Westminster strategy for the referendum is doing just fine - here's what the Indy columnist opens with:

_In the entire global history of the political campaign, has any been more misconceived, wretchedly executed and potentially self-defeating than the one designed to keep Scotland within the United Kingdom?_

Seems then that I am not the only one who thinks BT are playing with fire
		
Click to expand...

The two things I ignore - papers and politicians, they have an agenda which is in their, not everyday peoples, interest. I prefer to listen to people.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'm not suggesting that at all.  All I want to hear is something that says 'we have told you all the reasons you shouldn't vote YES - so in addition to that here is what we see as being the *benefits *for Scotland voting to stay in the Union'

Or are there no benefits?  Well of course there are benefits - so let's hear BT tell us of them.  Do BT think that in time Scotland will be able to have 'devo max'?  Would almost certainly be a sure way of completely killing off the risk of a YES.  Is that a bribe?  

If BT can't or won't offer more than the status quo then I think they are running a risk with the undecideds.  I would have thought that to be self-evident.  You are right I am sure that many undecideds will be happy with the status quo - even although they might not like it - it being preferable to life under a YES.  But there I am also convinced that there will be some who will not be so sure,

See also Matthew Norman piece in Independant today
_*
England should beg Scotland to stay*_

Click to expand...

Why should the UK offer anything more than what is currently happening 

It's not the UK that want change , it's not the UK that want Scotland Independant 

It's not up to the UK to sell the No vote 

It appears ( mainly because you keep repeating the same thing over and over again ) that you don't get that point


----------



## CMAC (Apr 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well since most here seem to think that the BT and Westminster strategy for the referendum is doing just fine - here's what the Indy columnist opens with:

_In the entire global history of the political campaign, has any been more misconceived, wretchedly executed and potentially self-defeating than the one designed to keep Scotland within the United Kingdom?_

Seems then that I am not the only one who thinks BT are playing with fire
		
Click to expand...

What's the relevance of that one individual? As relevant as your assumptions methinks. Why on earth are you getting so excited about non facts, assumptions and hearsay?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 16, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Not everyone here is or has been in the forces so you shouldn't assume it's acceptable everywhere.

As was already highlighted a long time ago, people accept this from people they tend to know and others (like me) don't tend to like it from strangers.

Again, this debate goes round in circles, no-one will agree so it's best being dropped
		
Click to expand...

If it's best being dropped then highlight that too Doon who used me calling Scottish people "Jocks" as it appears as some sort of proof that I'm anti Scottish 

I'm sorry that you find the word that appalling/racist and I will not use it aimed towards you but will continue to use it in banter with my fellow uk citizens from above the wall that I have met in the past and will meet in the future.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 16, 2014)

I am not a YES voter.

I simply think that the BT and Westminster campaign could and should do more to sell Scotland as part of the UK as I think it is a risky game for them just to say "we don't have to as it's up to YES to sell an iScotland"

If BT and Westminster choose not to then so be it - I think it's a mistake.

Polls say voters want a more positive NO message

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/positive-no-message-wanted.23979055


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 17, 2014)

As some like to quote from the papers http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...eferendum-woefully-unprepared-yes-vote-impact


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			As some like to quote from the papers http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...eferendum-woefully-unprepared-yes-vote-impact

Click to expand...

This is one mans opinion, which is fair enough, but I'm more of the thought things will be done according to The Edinburgh Agreement, with some disagreements,some minor mud slinging, but on the whole, worked out for the best possible way for both Scotland and rUK




			Salmond talks as though the negotiations following a yes vote would be straightforward, respectful and informed by mutual trust. Why should that be so? They would more likely be devious, antagonistic and riddled with mutual suspicion, as well as largely meaningless until after the 2015 general election.

AND

Meanwhile, what about the public mood? Views will not remain frozen unchangingly once the result is in. Nor will they inevitably remain benign and peaceful. Nationalist opinion could become more militant if the talks become bogged down. Even acts of violence are not inconceivable in certain circumstances or places, as anyone with a smattering of knowledge of the Irish treaty of 1921 will grasp.

The psychological impact in England, Wales and Northern Ireland of Scotland's rejection of the union, meanwhile, could be very unpredictable, and possibly nastily so.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 17, 2014)

Not read the paper before but I think this comment hits the nail on the head:

"The nationalists' always frame the independence argument as a battle between the Scots and the Tories. In a very real sense, Alex Salmond is fighting this campaign against Margaret Thatcher."


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Not read the paper before but I think this comment hits the nail on the head:

"The nationalists' always frame the independence argument as a battle between the Scots and the Tories. In a very real sense, Alex Salmond is fighting this campaign against Margaret Thatcher."
		
Click to expand...

and equally the unionists always frame a yes vote as a vote for Salmond.Both are utter bollocks.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			and equally the unionists always frame a yes vote as a vote for Salmond.Both are utter bollocks.
		
Click to expand...

The reason I find it interesting is because it is from someone left of Chairman Moe and not a lover of the Tories. Many of the arguments on here also appear to bare it out. ( This may be just my perception)


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			The reason I find it interesting is because it is from someone left of Chairman Moe and not a lover of the Tories. Many of the arguments on here also appear to bare it out. ( This may be just my perception)
		
Click to expand...

The tories are generally disliked, excluding a densely populated area of the south east of england, so Scotland isn't alone there.

do you agree that Salmond vs Tories = Salmond =yes?...ie both are sweeping generalisations


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The tories are generally disliked, excluding a densely populated area of the south east of england, so Scotland isn't alone there.

do you agree that Salmond vs Tories = Salmond =yes?...ie both are sweeping generalisations
		
Click to expand...

The Tories are supported throughout the Shires, not just the South East.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The tories are generally disliked, excluding a densely populated area of the south east of england, so Scotland isn't alone there.

do you agree that Salmond vs Tories = Salmond =yes?...ie both are sweeping generalisations
		
Click to expand...

IMHO I think that anytime any politician speaks in favour of a No vote it is a nail in the BT cause, and every time Salmond speaks the RUK generallystart getting the hump and would assist him with his wishes.  If he now insisted on a UK wide vote he mightstand a better chance wish really is a shame.


----------



## scottbrown (Apr 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The tories are generally disliked, excluding a densely populated area of the south east of england, so Scotland isn't alone there.

do you agree that Salmond vs Tories = Salmond =yes?...ie both are sweeping generalisations
		
Click to expand...

Certain areas of the south west are staunch Tory voters too, rightly or wrongly. The local MP here is a Tory and has been re-elected about 20 times ( or seems that much )


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 17, 2014)

SocketRocket said:





Adi2Dassler said:



			The tories are generally disliked, excluding a densely populated area of the south east of england, so Scotland isn't alone there.

do you agree that Salmond vs Tories = Salmond =yes?...ie both are sweeping generalisations
		
Click to expand...

The Tories are supported throughout the Shires, not just the South East.
		
Click to expand...

Heavens you guys talk some tripe!

Here's the results from 2010 Election!

Check the Blue areas of the map!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 17, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Heavens you guys talk some tripe!

Here's the results from 2010 Election!

Check the Blue areas of the map!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010

Click to expand...


Didn't Socket say that the Tories were also supported in the shires ( backed up by your map ) - or are you referring to Adi comment ?


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 17, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Didn't Socket say that the Tories were also supported in the shires ( backed up by your map ) - or are you referring to Adi comment ?
		
Click to expand...

Well, I guess Lancashire counts as one as does Yorkshire (though nothing in South Yorkshire)! And you might just about get away with Devonshire. But Essexshire, Sussexshire (x 2), Norfolkshire Suffolkshire, Cornwallshire, Dorsetshire, Avonshire,  Surreyshire, Kentshire, Humbersideshire are all new counties to me! 

Basically, there are lots of 'shire' counties and Tories win all but 1 - and they win lots of other counties too!

To limit it just to 'throughout the Shires' is not enough! It's pretty much throughout England except traditional industrial areas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_breakdown_of_the_United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 17, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, I guess Lancashire counts as one as does Yorkshire (though nothing in South Yorkshire)! And you might just about get away with Devonshire. But Essexshire, Sussexshire (x 2), Norfolkshire Suffolkshire, Cornwallshire, Dorsetshire, Avonshire,  Surreyshire, Kentshire, Humbersideshire are all new counties to me! 

Basically, there are lots of 'shire' counties and Tories win all but 1 - and they win lots of other counties too!

To limit it just to 'throughout the Shires' is not enough! It's pretty much throughout England except traditional industrial areas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_breakdown_of_the_United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010

Click to expand...

I'll forgive your lack of knowledge to our ancient land divisions due to you being a Colonialist.  The Shire Counties (Red areas on map.  Orange referred as Shires Occasionally)  Oh! and there is no such County as 'Avon'

View attachment 10019


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2014)

Different culture.

In England on TV last night a guy takes out a wad of notes to pay a Â£500 fee to a legalised thug for not paying a parking ticket.

In Scotland I have a skilled guy helping me to put up a fence.....his charge rate Â£8 per hour.
He would have to work 62 hours to pay for that parking fine. 

[I will pay him Â£12 an hour as he charges too low.]

Â£4 an hour to park at Lincoln
50p an hour to park in Ayr.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Different culture.

In England on TV last night a guy takes out a wad of notes to pay a Â£500 fee to a legalised thug for not paying a parking ticket.

In Scotland I have a skilled guy helping me to put up a fence.....his charge rate Â£8 per hour.
He would have to work 62 hours to pay for that parking fine. 

[I will pay him Â£12 an hour as he charges too low.]
		
Click to expand...

You really do post some very strange posts at times ! 

Are you suggesting there are none of the second person in the rest of the UK and in Scotland there are no companies charging fortunes to stop your car being towed or people with wads of notes !


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You really do post some very strange posts at times ! 

Are you suggesting there are none of the second person in the rest of the UK and in Scotland there are no companies charging fortunes to stop your car being towed or people with wads of notes !
		
Click to expand...

I'm not aware of any.......Scots law is different you know.
The Edinburgers will not doubt be able to correct me.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I'm not aware of any.......Scots law is different you know.
The Edinburgers will not doubt be able to correct me.
		
Click to expand...

Don't the SCS have the power to clamp ?

And in 2008 believe a lot of clamping was made illegal in England  but companies just towed away cars before asking for massive fees ? 

And the second part of your post about the skilled worker ? 

Again don't judge on minority


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2014)

So what is the going rate for a skilled self employed worker in Liverpool then Phil?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So what is the going rate for a skilled self employed worker in Liverpool then Phil?
		
Click to expand...

I have no idea - all depends on what the skill is 

I know some people in Scotland that can earn over 600 quid a day in IT


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So what is the going rate for a skilled self employed worker in Liverpool then Phil?
		
Click to expand...

Skilled, EMPLOYED, Liverpool


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 18, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Skilled, EMPLOYED, Liverpool 

Click to expand...

Bugger, that's not racist is it.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Bugger, that's not racist is it.
		
Click to expand...

Nope that's banter  :thup:


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Nope that's banter  :thup:
		
Click to expand...

GuDanke


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Bugger, that's not racist is it.
		
Click to expand...

Well you did miss out the 'S' word so probably not!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well you did miss out the 'S' word so probably not!
		
Click to expand...

Scouser ? 

So what do you think of IT skilled people earning thousands each week in Scotland ? Does that go against your theory ?


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			I'll forgive your lack of knowledge to our ancient land divisions due to you being a *Colonialist.*

Click to expand...

I'm most certainly not a Colonialist!

As I posted, 'The Shires' is not enough - certainly not a good description. What colour was that 'fat backside' of England in electoral results? Blue of course! So you would possibly be less wrong/incomplete if you simply stated 'England minus the South West and North (East)'!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Scouser ? 

So what do you think of IT skilled people earning thousands each week in Scotland ? Does that go against your theory ?
		
Click to expand...

I was talking about general ' skilled odd job men'. Roofers/Sweeps/Gardeners/Joiners etc

I shall see your Edinburgh IT person and raise you a London banker.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I know some people in Scotland that can earn over 600 quid a day in IT
		
Click to expand...

And how much would those folk be earning in Liverpool /Manchester/Birmingham - or London?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I was talking about general ' skilled odd job men'. Roofers/Sweeps/Gardeners/Joiners etc

I shall see your Edinburgh IT person and raise you a London banker.
		
Click to expand...


The wages differ dependent on the region in the UK as opposed to the culture 

I fully expect there will be some well paid "general skilled" workers in Scotland as there are in England , Wales and N. Ireland 


There will be areas in Scotland that get paid more than areas in the rest of the UK so your original point was very strange but also quite irrelevant


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And how much would those folk be earning in Liverpool /Manchester/Birmingham - or London?
		
Click to expand...

Depends for which company - our contractors don't earn that much , yet some companies will pay more 

Normally is around 200-400 a day for general IT Server/Application support 

DC network guys can earn more


----------



## NWJocko (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Different culture.

In England on TV last night a guy takes out a wad of notes to pay a Â£500 fee to a legalised thug for not paying a parking ticket.

In Scotland I have a skilled guy helping me to put up a fence.....his charge rate Â£8 per hour.
He would have to work 62 hours to pay for that parking fine. 

[I will pay him Â£12 an hour as he charges too low.]

Â£4 an hour to park at Lincoln
50p an hour to park in Ayr.
		
Click to expand...


A stupid, stupid post.

DfT, I'd suggest he's not all that "skilled" if he's charging Â£8 an hour.

Compare any City in the UK to London and it will look worse, London is a freak.

I know that in Banking the salaries available in Edinburgh are, at worst, on a par with those in Manchester and Leeds and on many occasions higher for equivalent roles.

Edit: I hope you don't think everyone in England could pay Â£500 cash on the spot?! Clueless.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Depends for which company - our contractors don't earn that much , yet some companies will pay more 

Normally is around 200-400 a day for general IT Server/Application support 

DC network guys can earn more
		
Click to expand...

We are into he Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics issue again - or even numbers not worthy of being called Statistics!

Compare like with like! Not knocking the numbers btw. They match what I know to be the rates. Just their misuse! I certainly know of IT folk working in the Midlands/North West getting 600+. Some are even worth it!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			A stupid, stupid post.

DfT, I'd suggest he's not all that "skilled" if he's charging Â£8 an hour.

Compare any City in the UK to London and it will look worse, London is a freak.

I know that in Banking the salaries available in Edinburgh are, at worst, on a par with those in Manchester and Leeds and on many occasions higher for equivalent roles.

Edit: I hope you don't think everyone in England could pay Â£500 cash on the spot?! Clueless.
		
Click to expand...

He is well skilled, otherwise I would not use him, so not so stupid thanks.

On the programme ALL of the people there eventually paid their fines on the spot either in cash or by card. The fines were around the Â£500/600 mark. Who is stupid now!!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			We are into he Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics issue again - or even numbers not worthy of being called Statistics!

Compare like with like! Not knocking the numbers btw. They match what I know to be the rates. Just their misuse! I certainly know of IT folk working in the Midlands/North West getting 600+. Some are even worth it!

Click to expand...

I just mentioned the IT as a counter to DfT 8 pound an hour general skilled worker to show that Scotland can get people earning big wages 

Know plenty in IT earning over a grand a day plus more


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			He is well skilled, otherwise I would not use him, so not so stupid thanks.

On the programme ALL of the people there eventually paid their fines on the spot either in cash or by card. The fines were around the Â£500/600 mark. Who is stupid now!!
		
Click to expand...

Well skilled at what ? Putting a fence up or other building areas ?


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			He is well skilled, otherwise I would not use him, so not so stupid thanks.

On the programme ALL of the people there eventually paid their fines on the spot either in cash or by card. The fines were around the Â£500/600 mark. Who is stupid now!!
		
Click to expand...

So they made a programme which showed everyone paying their fine on the spot, that means absolutely nothing; perhaps the programme makers thought footage of people not paying their fine on the spot might be a bit dull (sorry - duller).


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2014)

One guy refused to pay and they could not prove who owned his van.
They let him go and told him the bailiffs would visit his house.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I just mentioned the IT as a counter to DfT 8 pound an hour general skilled worker to show that Scotland can get people earning big wages 

Know plenty in IT earning over a grand a day plus more
		
Click to expand...

So you know of *plenty* earning 1K+ in England and *some* in Scotland earning 600. The way you've misused numbers, that means Scottish rates are less than 60% of English ones!

Stop faffing and get some *facts*. 

Oh and maybe get back to topic too! It's about independ*e*nce (please note the spelling!) not pay rates.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			So you know of *plenty* earning 1K+ in England and *some* in Scotland earning 600. The way you've misused numbers, that means Scottish rates are less than 60% of English ones!

Stop faffing and get some *facts*. 

Oh and maybe get back to topic too! It's about independ*e*nce (please note the spelling!) not pay rates.
		
Click to expand...


To join you on the pedantic train

When did I say know plenty earn over 1K in *ENGLAND*

Maybe cover yourself before trying to be a smart arse


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			To join you on the pedantic train

When did I say know plenty earn over 1K in *ENGLAND*

Maybe cover yourself before trying to be a smart arse
		
Click to expand...

It was indeed an assumption/inference - but a pretty reasonable one under the circumstances (unless outside UK which merely confirms my 'faffing' comment). If they were in Scotland you would have used them rather than those on 600.

So where are they? Rates in Ireland and Wales ain't normally that high!

And you next bit of faff could well be that you didn't mention Â£s either!


----------



## NWJocko (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			He is well skilled, otherwise I would not use him, so not so stupid thanks.

On the programme ALL of the people there eventually paid their fines on the spot either in cash or by card. The fines were around the Â£500/600 mark. Who is stupid now!!
		
Click to expand...

I said your post was stupid (not you) as it implies (through the "different culture" comment) that everyone is loaded down here whilst everyone in Scotland is skint/underpaid/put upon which, I assume to make it relevant to the topic, you take as a reason for ascots wanting independence?!

So, from your last paragraph you are firmly of the belief that everyone in England can pay a Â£500 fine on the spot whilst nobody in Scotland can, is that what you are saying?

Why is your friend only charging Â£8 an hour out of interest?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			It was indeed an assumption/inference - but a pretty reasonable one under the circumstances (unless outside UK which merely confirms my 'faffing' comment). If they were in Scotland you would have used them rather than those on 600.

So where are they? Rates in Ireland and Wales ain't normally that high!

And you next bit of faff could well be that you didn't mention Â£s either!
		
Click to expand...

I do believe my point has been made and I also believe you wanted it back on topic :thup:

Have a good evening


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Apr 18, 2014)

Gents, can we calm things down please. Before it gets out of hand.


Thanks


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 18, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I do believe my point has been made and I also believe you wanted it back on topic :thup:

Have a good evening
		
Click to expand...

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 18, 2014)

I have never heard of anyone paying such a huge fine in Scotland.

By the way the programme was being presented it seems quite normal in London. 
The initial charge was Â£60 by the time the bailiffs got involved it seemed to escalate to Â£600 or car confiscation. 

The comment I was making was about the 62 hours of labour that an ordinary Scottish workman would take to pay such an unfair sum.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I have never heard of anyone paying such a huge fine in Scotland.

By the way the programme was being presented it seems quite normal in London. 
The initial charge was Â£60 by the time the bailiffs got involved it seemed to escalate to Â£600 or car confiscation. 

The comment I was making was about the 62 hours of labour that an ordinary Scottish workman would take to pay such an unfair sum.
		
Click to expand...

Again you are massively generalising based on one person ?!? 

And a lot of people get paid a lot less than Â£8 an hour all over the UK - not just your one Scottish Workman


----------



## NWJocko (Apr 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The comment I was making was about the 62 hours of labour that an ordinary Scottish workman would take to pay such an unfair sum.
		
Click to expand...

The rest is nonsense.

What makes the Scottish workman different to any other "ordinary" workman outside of London?

If you visited some areas of Lancashire (and I'm sure elsewhere in England) you would see that things are not a bed of roses down here by any stretch......

Often folk will pay these things on credit card as car is second only to mortgage payments in people's priorities (debt priorities) so when things have escalated they'd sooner take the debt on credit card than lose their car.

Still not sure what relevance it has to the independence debate


----------



## chris661 (Apr 18, 2014)

End of the discussion regarding wages and fines thanks.

Back to the debate of independence or this is finished as a thread.

Ta Muchly.


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I'm most certainly not a Colonialist!

As I posted, 'The Shires' is not enough - certainly not a good description. What colour was that 'fat backside' of England in electoral results? Blue of course! So you would possibly be less wrong/incomplete if you simply stated 'England minus the South West and North (East)'!
		
Click to expand...

You seem to misunderstand the term "The Shires' It's not a line on a map, it's more a cultural divide, a bit like the Cotswolds or Wessex. It's the areas most unaffected by the new idiom of multiculturalism, where people are most like to enjoy the traditional way of life and don't see a need to change.   It's Conservatism, the wish to maintain culture.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 19, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			You seem to misunderstand the term "The Shires' It's not a line on a map, it's more a cultural divide, a bit like the Cotswolds or Wessex. It's the areas most unaffected by the new idiom of multiculturalism, where people are most like to enjoy the traditional way of life and don't see a need to change.   It's Conservatism, the wish to maintain culture.
		
Click to expand...

Which makes a mockery of your post with the map showing them!

About as sensible as saying the Tories appeal to all the conservative folk and Labour to the (manual) workers! Talk about stating the bleedin' obvious!

And I think you've forgotten what the tack was all about - the *areas* where the Tories dominate. So it IS lines on a map, not the type of folk who live in those areas - which you may have described. You seem to be saying that 'The Shires' has 2 (or more) meanings - physical and cultural.

Just as it wasn't good enough to restrict their dominance to the South East, it's also not good enough to restrict it to 'the shires'! Just look at the bleedin' map and you will see that's obvious!

I still maintain my description of the areas is as good as, and probably better than, any  other - though I should add 'and/or Mining' to the 'traditional Industrial' exception.

Now, how many of your conservatives - 'unaffected by the new idiom of multiculturalism' if that's how *you* want to describe them - are there in Scotland?  Btw. That's not my view of the vast majority of Tory voters, but there certainly seems to be a few of those old relics still about! My thoughts are that it's those preaching Grandparents and Mother-in-law types that the Yes voters are keen to get rid of and  carve their own destiny!


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 19, 2014)

Oh, and back On Topic.

Can the BT/No proponents actually provide any REAL reasons why the Scots would actually be better off staying in The Union - transition difficulties excluded.

While I can list a couple, it seems to me that the Vision of the benefits of self-determination that the Yes campaign is putting across is much more powerful and compelling than those reasons. That is what I see as the problem the BT/No campaign has to overcome - or continue to, very negatively, push the fear of change (conservatism?) that is natural.

And for those BT/No supporters..a couple of question. Would you vote to withdraw from/diminish the Brussels/Strasbourg EU Parlia ment's  power over UK? Is your answer compatible with the equivalent by the Scots?


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And for those BT/No supporters..a couple of question. Would you vote to withdraw from/diminish the Brussels/Strasbourg EU Parlia ment's  power over UK? Is your answer compatible with the equivalent by the Scots?
		
Click to expand...

I think you know the answer to that already but that is a completely different argument as the vote for joining the EU or not was based on a completely different set of criteria than is in force today and most of the legislation and spending in the EU is done by faceless bureaucrats under no real control.
Last time I looked Scotland already has control of the majority of what goes on up there with control over a lot of its spending and has its own legal system and it even has MPs that can exert control over what happens in RUK with votes in Westminister.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 19, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I think you know the answer to that already but that is a completely different argument as the vote for joining the EU or not was based on a completely different set of criteria than is in force today and most of the legislation and spending in the EU is done by faceless bureaucrats under no real control.
Last time I looked Scotland already has control of the majority of what goes on up there with control over a lot of its spending and has its own legal system and it even has MPs that can exert control over what happens in RUK with votes in Westminister.
		
Click to expand...

Well, you'd be wrong! I have no idea! 

But it does seem like selfish or at least self-righteous, hypocrisy to want freedom from the shackles of Brussels, then deny Scotland the equivalent.

EEC may have started off as different, but has certainly morphed, thus the name change and the need for re-affirmation - something denied, out of fear of a 'No', by the Blair administration with typical 'we know best' arrogance. So the issues are really the same - independence and self determination, while still maintaining all the good things about co-operation and mutual benefit. 

Who is really at fault if there are 'faceless bureaucrats under no real control' btw!

If you think Scottish MPs exert any *control* over what happens in rUK - in this Parliament - you are in cloud cuckoo land! Arrogant tokenism of a benevolent dictatorship is probably the best description imo - at least when Westminster is Tory dominated. Has Broon had any influence since 2010? His own constituency, in fact, typifies the problem! To the Scots, Westminster and those with real power to make a difference to their lives and futures are also faceless bureaucrats over whom they have no real control!


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, you'd be wrong! I have no idea! 

But it does seem like selfish or at least self-righteous, hypocrisy to want freedom from the shackles of Brussels, then deny Scotland the equivalent.

EEC may have started off as different, but has certainly morphed, thus the name change and the need for re-affirmation - something denied, out of fear of a 'No', by the Blair administration with typical 'we know best' arrogance. So the issues are really the same - independence and self determination, while still maintaining all the good things about co-operation and mutual benefit. 

Who is really at fault if there are 'faceless bureaucrats under no real control' btw!

If you think Scottish MPs exert any *control* over what happens in rUK - in this Parliament - you are in cloud cuckoo land! Arrogant tokenism of a benevolent dictatorship is probably the best description imo - at least when Westminster is Tory dominated. Has Broon had any influence since 2010? His own constituency, in fact, typifies the problem! To the Scots, Westminster and those with real power to make a difference to their lives and futures are also faceless bureaucrats over whom they have no real control!
		
Click to expand...

You are ignoring the fact that Scotland has it's own parliament.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, you'd be wrong! I have no idea! 

But it does seem like selfish or at least self-righteous, hypocrisy to want freedom from the shackles of Brussels, then deny Scotland the equivalent.

EEC may have started off as different, but has certainly morphed, thus the name change and the need for re-affirmation - something denied, out of fear of a 'No', by the Blair administration with typical 'we know best' arrogance. So the issues are really the same - independence and self determination, while still maintaining all the good things about co-operation and mutual benefit. 

Who is really at fault if there are 'faceless bureaucrats under no real control' btw!

If you think Scottish MPs exert any *control* over what happens in rUK - in this Parliament - you are in cloud cuckoo land! Arrogant tokenism of a benevolent dictatorship is probably the best description imo - at least when Westminster is Tory dominated. Has Broon had any influence since 2010? His own constituency, in fact, typifies the problem! To the Scots, Westminster and those with real power to make a difference to their lives and futures are also faceless bureaucrats over whom they have no real control!
		
Click to expand...

A post with a dangled fishing rod that is not worthy of a reply as I presume by your other posts that you do have a grasp of politics even though your grasp on reality may be slipping.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 19, 2014)

How many on hear can name their local appointed faceless MEP?
I certainly cannot.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			How many on hear can name their local appointed faceless MEP?
I certainly cannot.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I can but I tend to check out people's record during a run up to an election. However it's not the elected ones that cause the problems. It's the commissioners and their cronies that are the major problem.


----------



## chris661 (Apr 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			How many on hear can name their local appointed faceless MEP?
I certainly cannot.
		
Click to expand...




Old Skier said:



			Unfortunately I can but I tend to check out people's record during a run up to an election. However it's not the elected ones that cause the problems. It's the commissioners and their cronies that are the major problem.
		
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with a debate on Scotland?

Doon you seem I the t on trying to take this off topic. Start a new thread if you so wish but stop trying to go off on a tangent in the is one. There have already been a few warnings regarding this. Thanks.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 19, 2014)

chris661 said:



			What does that have to do with a debate on Scotland?

Doon you seem I the t on trying to take this off topic. Start a new thread if you so wish but stop trying to go off on a tangent in the is one. There have already been a few warnings regarding this. Thanks.
		
Click to expand...

To be fair I think this is in context as it's to do with the nasty Brits wanting to withdraw from the EU and running their own affairs and some Scots wanting to do the same although if they new anything about the EU and the iscot issue it is completely different.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Apr 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			If you think Scottish MPs exert any *control* over what happens in rUK - in this Parliament - you are in cloud cuckoo land! Arrogant tokenism of a benevolent dictatorship is probably the best description imo - at least when Westminster is Tory dominated. Has Broon had any influence since 2010? His own constituency, in fact, typifies the problem! To the Scots, Westminster and those with real power to make a difference to their lives and futures are also faceless bureaucrats over whom they have no real control!
		
Click to expand...

Certainly have done whenever the UK has had a Labour Government. Anyone remember how Scottish Labour MP's helped the then Govt to get its legislation on tuition fees for universities through.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 19, 2014)

chris661 said:



			What does that have to do with a debate on Scotland?

Doon you seem I the t on trying to take this off topic. Start a new thread if you so wish but stop trying to go off on a tangent in the is one. There have already been a few warnings regarding this. Thanks.
		
Click to expand...

I have to stick my hand up here and say that it was me that brought the EU comparison up.

But *without getting into the actual debate over continued EU membership*, I believe the situation is equivalent, though not identical.

How can those who object to the perceived loss of control to the EU, then also deny the equivalent to Scotland?


----------



## chris661 (Apr 19, 2014)

Fine in context it is relevant. However asking who can name their "faceless MEP" doesn't seem to have any relevance to a debate on Scotland. I understand the comparisons regarding self rule/governance but in this case it seems to be nothing more than an attempt to stir up the pot a bit.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 19, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Certainly have done whenever the UK has had a Labour Government. Anyone remember how Scottish Labour MP's helped the then Govt to get its legislation on tuition fees for universities through.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure why he brings up Gordon Brown either. If ever there is someone being paid under false pretences he takes the haggis. His voting record and appearance in Westminister during this Paliament is a disgrace. source: TheyWorkForYou


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Can the BT/No proponents actually provide any REAL reasons why the Scots would actually be better off staying in The Union - transition difficulties excluded.
		
Click to expand...

The ability to borrow money, the thing that ALL countries need to do irrespective of tax revenues. Scotland may end up with a credit rating akin to Norway's but because their income is so much lower and the value of their assets would be lower and then minus what they spend, their worth as a country would be lower than it is as part of the Union.

The White paper talks of joining the EU and Nato but gives no indication what this would cost. The White paper shows a healthy surplus but its EU contribution based on % of UK population alone, irrespective of how much oil revenue there is, would see the surplus pretty much gone. Then add in the NATO (and UN membership) it talks about in the White paper... as a country Scotland wouldn't be better off. No worse off, no better off but with a lot lower buffer available from the ECB & IMF.

The White paper also speaks of generating an extra Â£250 mill from tax efficiencies. If this figure forms part of balancing the books, and it isn't realised, I wonder where this extra Â£50 per head will come from?

I see lots of promises in the White paper of shiney benefits but there's a lot of substance missing from how those benefits would be realised.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 19, 2014)

chris661 said:



			What does that have to do with a debate on Scotland?

Doon you seem I the t on trying to take this off topic. Start a new thread if you so wish but stop trying to go off on a tangent in the is one. There have already been a few warnings regarding this. Thanks.
		
Click to expand...

Part of the discussion was about UK citizens wishing to leave the European Union and Scotland wishing to leave UK.

If that was off topic to the thread then sorry, apologies.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 19, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			The ability to borrow money, the thing that ALL countries need to do irrespective of tax revenues. Scotland may end up with a credit rating akin to Norway's but because their income is so much lower and the value of their assets would be lower and then minus what they spend, their worth as a country would be lower than it is as part of the Union.
		
Click to expand...

Well, that argument would be easily countered by the fact that the amount needed to be borrowed would be smaller as well.

The Ratings guys don't seem to think there would be a problem with an iScotland and there are certainly pretty much equivalent economies in Europe and around the world of the size envisaged. Comparing iScotland to Norway is a bit aggressive imo, though the opportunity and proposal was there, and shunned by Westminster, decades ago!



Hobbit said:



			The White paper talks of joining the EU and Nato but gives no indication what this would cost. The White paper shows a healthy surplus but its EU contribution based on % of UK population alone, irrespective of how much oil revenue there is, would see the surplus pretty much gone. Then add in the NATO (and UN membership) it talks about in the White paper... as a country Scotland wouldn't be better off. No worse off, no better off but with a lot lower buffer available from the ECB & IMF.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed, the cost of maintaining all the bureaucracy of a separate country is considerable - and conveniently forgotten/not costed in the White Paper. Balanced (?) by the ability to have it all specific to iScotland needs/views. Whether the benefit of that 'balance' is worth the cost is one of the questions for Scots to consider imo.



Hobbit said:



			The White paper also speaks of generating an extra Â£250 mill from tax efficiencies. If this figure forms part of balancing the books, and it isn't realised, I wonder where this extra Â£50 per head will come from?
		
Click to expand...

Hang on. Even if it doesn't happen, there's no 'extra Â£50 per head' required.

And the streamlining of the Tax System is long overdue. UK apparently has the most complicated one on the planet!



Hobbit said:



			I see lots of promises in the White paper of shiney benefits but there's a lot of substance missing from how those benefits would be realised.
		
Click to expand...

Yep! That's what White Papers are often about! The Vision, not the Pathway! 

And while I agree with you, that's not actually an answer to the question I asked. But at least you have answered it which is what 'debate' is about. Repetitive banging on with the same arguments from the same entrenched positions is not 'debate' imo! I'd like someone to sway me (not that I have a say) with a compelling reason one way or the other, but I'm afraid that's unlikely to happen.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, that argument would be easily countered by the fact that the amount needed to be borrowed would be smaller as well.

The Ratings guys don't seem to think there would be a problem with an iScotland and there are certainly pretty much equivalent economies in Europe and around the world of the size envisaged. Comparing iScotland to Norway is a bit aggressive imo, though the opportunity and proposal was there, and shunned by Westminster, decades ago!


Indeed, the cost of maintaining all the bureaucracy of a separate country is considerable - and conveniently forgotten/not costed in the White Paper. Balanced (?) by the ability to have it all specific to iScotland needs/views. Whether the benefit of that 'balance' is worth the cost is one of the questions for Scots to consider imo.


Hang on. Even if it doesn't happen, there's no 'extra Â£50 per head' required.

And the streamlining of the Tax System is long overdue. UK apparently has the most complicated one on the planet!



Yep! That's what White Papers are often about! The Vision, not the Pathway! 

And while I agree with you, that's not actually an answer to the question I asked. But at least you have answered it which is what 'debate' is about. Repetitive banging on with the same arguments from the same entrenched positions is not 'debate' imo! I'd like someone to sway me (not that I have a say) with a compelling reason one way or the other, but I'm afraid that's unlikely to happen.
		
Click to expand...

It was Alex Slamond who compared Scotland to the El Dorado of a Nowegian economy.

NATO & the UN membership; again, its the El Dorado in the White paper but without the costings.

Â£50 per head; it is an extra Â£50 per head IF the party in power is expecting those efficiencies to balance the books on other spending, e.g. EU membership.

The White paper may well be the vision/pathway but it is the promises to the Scottish people therein that may lead to them voting Yes without the full knowledge of the costs to turn those visions into reality.

Why should the Scottish people vote "no?" That's up to them to decide but I wouldn't be voting Yes based on unfounded promises. If the Yes campaign could show what it would cost to reach El Dorado, and it was affordable, and had the benefits that they seem to be selling, I'd vote Yes - not that I can...

A "no" buys them what they've already got, albeit I'd expect a move towards more devo. A "yes" buys uncosted promises. WOW!! Independence but unfulfilled promises or a heavier financial burden.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 19, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			A "no" buys them what they've already got, albeit I'd expect a move towards more devo. A "yes" buys uncosted promises. WOW!! Independence but unfulfilled promises or a heavier financial burden.
		
Click to expand...

It buys what it already has and what the UK government has already promised - e.g. more spending cuts.  It gives absolutely nothing about the future e.g. whether funding through Barnett remains the same; whether there would be any move towards devo max (which would quite possibly be resisted by rest of UK electorate); and a risk of UK exiting the EU on the basis of an English electorate vote perhaps not reflecting the general wishes of Scotland, Wales and NI electorate.

So BT are simply offering 'better the devil you know'

Fair enough - but not a very inspiring shout out for your vote; and not one you might want to wake up to on the morning after a NO knowing that the devil you know is what you've got - you might as well say for good.  As for a YES there being no going back.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 19, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			...
Â£50 per head; it is an extra Â£50 per head IF the party in power is expecting those efficiencies to balance the books on other spending...
		
Click to expand...

And only IF they don't happen! In this case, I'd be inclined to back the likelihood of savings - at least in the short term.

I agree that the 'Yes' needs to convince Scots that things are affordable and will be better - even if not the El Dorado result. I think they are doing a pretty good job. whether they can sell it enough to overcome the inertia of 'what they've already got' remains to be seen. Devo-Max is off the table - for now!

And Salmond didn't actually *compare* Norway as an El Dorado - except for the Oil Fund. But he did use it as an *example*, along with other countries of similar size to iScotland. Quite a reasonable thing to do imo.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It buys what it already has and what the UK government has already promised - e.g. more spending cuts.  It gives absolutely nothing about the future e.g. whether funding through Barnett remains the same; whether there would be any move towards devo max (which would quite possibly be resisted by rest of UK electorate); and a risk of UK exiting the EU on the basis of an English electorate vote perhaps not reflecting the general wishes of Scotland, Wales and NI electorate.

So BT are simply offering 'better the devil you know'

Fair enough - but not a very inspiring shout out for your vote; and not one you might want to wake up to on the morning after a NO knowing that the devil you know is what you've got - you might as well say for good.  As for a YES there being no going back.
		
Click to expand...

Does BT have to offer more? Bearing in mind the shared debt, and even the White paper recognises that it will inherit a share, do you think Scotland could service a debt of Â£9 billion AND deliver on the promises in the White paper? Even the White paper doesn't say whether the debt will be split based on where historical spend has happened or on the % of population but gives some veiled idea it will be the former - lol, the westminster parliament that signs up for that version will be throwing votes away.

The austerity cuts are a reality that some in Scotland don't want to accept, and some think that walking away from the Union means walking away from the debt.

If I was Scottish, and living in Scotland, I'd be voting Yes purely for self-determination. I certainly wouldn't be voting Yes based on the Castles in the sky that Alex Salmond is trying to sell to the undecideds.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 19, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Does BT have to offer more? Bearing in mind the shared debt, and even the White paper recognises that it will inherit a share, do you think Scotland could service a debt of Â£9 billion AND deliver on the promises in the White paper? Even the White paper doesn't say whether the debt will be split based on where historical spend has happened or on the % of population but gives some veiled idea it will be the former - lol, the westminster parliament that signs up for that version will be throwing votes away.

The austerity cuts are a reality that some in Scotland don't want to accept, and some think that walking away from the Union means walking away from the debt.

If I was Scottish, and living in Scotland, I'd be voting Yes purely for self-determination. I certainly wouldn't be voting Yes based on the Castles in the sky that Alex Salmond is trying to sell to the undecideds.
		
Click to expand...

Fact is that YES are offering a vision - and even although you may have a feeling that in the short term delivering even 10% of it will be a tall order - they (as in Scotland) over time just might deliver more.  And for some that prospect will still be quite a bit more enticing than 'more of the same' - for as long as long is.


----------



## Val (Apr 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Fact is that YES are offering a vision - and even although you may have a feeling that in the short term delivering even 10% of it will be a tall order - they (as in Scotland) over time just might deliver more.  And for some that prospect will still be quite a bit more enticing than 'more of the same' - for as long as long is.
		
Click to expand...

We hear you and hear you every day about this. You prefer the BT campaign to plan a vision for the future the reality is the don't have to, the only 100% guarantee is a NO vote see's no change to what's there now and all they have to do is highlight the many flaws and negatives of the YES campaign. Why do they have to do anything different? All they need to do is prove the doubters that there are too many holes in the YES campaign, which is what they are doing.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			We hear you and hear you every day about this. You prefer the BT campaign to plan a vision for the future the reality is the don't have to, the only 100% guarantee is a NO vote see's no change to what's there now and all they have to do is highlight the many flaws and negatives of the YES campaign. Why do they have to do anything different? All they need to do is prove the doubters that there are too many holes in the YES campaign, which is what they are doing.
		
Click to expand...

Very well said Val. The negativity that some see from the "no" campaigners is the only option the no campaigners need to follow, i.e. highlight the flaws in the "sell." If Westminster decide on buying Yes votes by offering Scotland more, they risk a back lash at the next election.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 22, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Very well said Val. The negativity that some see from the "no" campaigners is the only option the no campaigners need to follow, i.e. highlight the flaws in the "sell." If Westminster decide on buying Yes votes by offering Scotland more, they risk a back lash at the next election.
		
Click to expand...

OK - but I am a little baffled why asking for more positivity from BT provokes this reaction - because 'all they need to do is...' sounds like they are feart of opening up a debate that they don't want to have.  So instead fall back on 'don't need to...'.  

Which is fine if that's what they want to do.  But risky to them IMO.


----------



## Val (Apr 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			OK - but I am a little baffled why asking for more positivity from BT provokes this reaction - because 'all they need to do is...' sounds like they are feart of opening up a debate that they don't want to have.  So instead fall back on 'don't need to...'.  

Which is fine if that's what they want to do.  But risky to them IMO.
		
Click to expand...

Risky maybe but it's full of truths and not full of inaccurate or unrealistic goals and objectives.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 22, 2014)

Well, the continuing negativity from BT ramps even more today when Gordon Brown, the man who effectively stole Â£100 Billion from the pension pot, preaches that iScotlands pensions might be at risk.You seriously couldn't make it up.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...id-on-pensions-costs-Britain-100-billion.html


And then the MSM tell an entirely different story either side of the border.And folk think this is the best course of action for unionists to peddle.They must all be agents for YES.

https://twitter.com/AngusMacNeilMP/status/458540503924219904/photo/1


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Well, the continuing negativity from BT ramps even more today when Gordon Brown, the man who effectively stole Â£100 Billion from the pension pot, preaches that iScotlands pensions might be at risk.You seriously couldn't make it up.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...id-on-pensions-costs-Britain-100-billion.html

Click to expand...


If what he says is true (and I have no idea if it is or not) then it seems unfair to simply criticise it as negative? And you attack the character of the man making the statement rather than the veracity of what he is saying.

This isn't about what Gordon Brown did or didn't do as chancellor or PM, it's about the future of our country. 

How I wish this pathetic "debate" was over and we could just vote on the damn thing and move on.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 22, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			If what he says is true (and I have no idea if it is or not) then it seems unfair to simply criticise it as negative? And you attack the character of the man making the statement rather than the veracity of what he is saying.

This isn't about what Gordon Brown did or didn't do as chancellor or PM, it's about the future of our country. 

How I wish this pathetic "debate" was over and we could just vote on the damn thing and move on.
		
Click to expand...

I think what Brown (and Darling) did whilst Chancellor or PM is relevant.He's asking us to believe his opinion on pensions but was responsible for Â£100 Billion worth of cuts to it.The DWP have confirmed last year that pensions will be safe guarded.

He's trotting out the same nonsense that Scotland is too poor to afford to run itself, which was pretty much rubished last year, and yet here comes Brown ( the man who described himself last year as an 'ex-politician') regurgitating lies and peddling myths.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 22, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Risky maybe but it's full of truths and not full of inaccurate or unrealistic goals and objectives.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry - not sure what you mean as being full of truths?  If BT made some statements about the next 5yrs for Scotland in the UK following a NO then I'm sure that that would indeed be full of truths - some positive and some difficult I have no doubt.  However I'm guessing that BT don't want to do that and I can understand why.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Brown ( the man who described himself last year as an 'ex-politician')
		
Click to expand...

And still draws a very nice salary thank you very much and has one of the worse attendance records in Parliament.


----------



## Val (Apr 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Sorry - not sure what you mean as being full of truths?  If BT made some statements about the next 5yrs for Scotland in the UK following a NO then I'm sure that that would indeed be full of truths - some positive and some difficult I have no doubt.  However I'm guessing that BT don't want to do that and I can understand why.
		
Click to expand...

Ok, full of truths maybe a bad choice of words but you get my drift.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Sorry - not sure what you mean as being full of truths?  If BT made some statements about the next 5yrs for Scotland in the UK following a NO then I'm sure that that would indeed be full of truths - some positive and some difficult I have no doubt.  However I'm guessing that BT don't want to do that and I can understand why.
		
Click to expand...

Do you think that by asking the same question/ repeating the same statement a few hundred times (and this isn't the only thread) that eventually people will lose the will to live and agree with you?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 23, 2014)

Two RAF Typhoons have been scrambled to intercept Russian A/C near the NW of Scotland 

Will an Independant Scotland have the ability to do that in their waters ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 23, 2014)

Probably, as they will have an air force, navy and army.

Although it is unlikely Russia would wish to attack a peaceful non aggressive nation like iScotland.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Probably, as they will have an air force, navy and army.

Although it is unlikely Russia would wish to attack a peaceful non aggressive nation like iScotland.
		
Click to expand...


Will they ? That's quite a big task to build up a full military from nothing ( as well as being expensive )


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Probably, as they will have an air force, navy and army.

Although it is unlikely Russia would wish to attack a peaceful non aggressive nation like iScotland.
		
Click to expand...

Once they recruit and train it that is


----------



## c1973 (Apr 23, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Two RAF Typhoons have been scrambled to intercept Russian A/C near the NW of Scotland 

Will an Independant Scotland have the ability to do that in their waters ?
		
Click to expand...

Nah, our defence force will be the half brick and ginger boatil (pop bottle)


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 23, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Nah, our defence force will be the half brick and ginger boatil (pop bottle) 

Click to expand...

Or revert to the tried and tested method of raising our kilts and showing them oor erses.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Or revert to the tried and tested method of raising our kilts and showing them oor erses.
		
Click to expand...

Well, it worked for Mel Gibson......


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 23, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Well, it worked for Mel Gibson......
		
Click to expand...

Don't be silly, they did not have kilts in 1314.
The wee fat Dutch king invented them around 450 years later.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Don't be silly, they did not have kilts in 1314.
The wee fat Dutch king invented them around 450 years later.
		
Click to expand...

Thought that was Walter Scott? Or did he just invent tartan?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 23, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Thought that was Walter Scott? Or did he just invent tartan?
		
Click to expand...

He certainly improved it's popularity.
I have often wondered if Princes Street should now have a Rowling Monument.


[Sorry got my Wallaces and Bruces muddled up a bit earlier.]


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Or revert to the tried and tested method of raising our kilts and showing them oor erses.
		
Click to expand...

And roll some burning hay bales at them and pull up some pointy sticks.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:





c1973 said:



			Well, it worked for Mel Gibson......
		
Click to expand...

Don't be silly, they did not have kilts in 1314.
The wee fat Dutch king invented them around 450 years later.
		
Click to expand...

Just another factual inaccuracy by the distinctly anti-English seeming Gibson!


----------



## c1973 (Apr 23, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Just another factual inaccuracy by the distinctly anti-English seeming Gibson!
		
Click to expand...

You'll be telling me they never painted their faces blue next......


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 23, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Just another factual inaccuracy by the distinctly anti-English seeming Gibson!
		
Click to expand...

To be fair I think they had plaids and not kilts in Braveheart.

[Can I claim my prize now for mentioning Braveheart on St Georges Day]

I think I saw Rob Roy Macgregor eating a rabbit though, perhaps he was a time traveller.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 23, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			And roll some burning hay bales at them and pull up some pointy sticks.
		
Click to expand...

Stirling Bridge was the best one though. That's when naked Highlanders crawled through the mud along the causeway to knock the  heavily armoured English knights off their horses with big long poles.
Very inventive fighters were the 12th centuary Scots


----------



## c1973 (Apr 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Stirling Bridge was the best one though. That's when naked Highlanders crawled through the mud along the causeway to knock the  heavily armoured English knights off their horses with big long poles.
Very inventive fighters were the 12th centuary Scots
		
Click to expand...

Not exactly our most chivalrous moment though, letting half their army across before "steaming in". The done thing in those days was to let the other team line up properly like gentlemen before the onslaught. We kinda cheated a wee bit. Lol
Very civilised was war in those days.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



*Stirling Bridge* was the best one though. That's when naked Highlanders crawled through the mud along the causeway to knock the  heavily armoured English knights off their horses with big long poles.
Very inventive fighters were the *12th centuary* Scots
		
Click to expand...

And at least 100 years ahead of their time!:rofl:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 23, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Not exactly our most chivalrous moment though, letting half their army across before "steaming in". The done thing in those days was to let the other team line up properly like gentlemen before the onslaught. We kinda cheated a wee bit. Lol
Very civilised was war in those days.
		
Click to expand...

Towards the end of the battle the Scots were flagging and losing ground.
Word had got back to the Scots encampment that there had been a great Scots victory.
The camp followers, women, boys and dogs all came running over the hill to congratulate the army.
The English thought that they were re-inforcements and fled the battle.

[I know cos I wos there]


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 23, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And at least 100 years ahead of their time!:rofl:
		
Click to expand...

Oops, I always forget to add on!!


----------



## c1973 (Apr 23, 2014)

As an aside The Bruce is on movies for men at the moment. Absolutely fascinating period of history and thoroughly absorbing story, but probably a crap film. Lol.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 23, 2014)

Nigel Tranter was a friend of my aunts and used to live in the house nearest to the wooden bridge at Aberlady Bay.

I have read nearly all of his historical novels, great reads, and an enjoyable way of learning your countries history.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 23, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Two RAF Typhoons have been scrambled to intercept Russian A/C near the NW of Scotland 

Will an Independant Scotland have the ability to do that in their waters ?
		
Click to expand...

No.We'll not be allowed planes or ships once independent.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 23, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			No.We'll not be allowed planes or ships once independent.
		
Click to expand...

Not even if we ask nicely?


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 23, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Two RAF Typhoons have been scrambled to intercept Russian A/C near the NW of Scotland
		
Click to expand...

And what exactly did that achieve?

Apart from identifying them as Russian A/c in International air Space.

rUK will be able to continue to do so from wherever it moves the Typhoons to after Lossiemouth (after Leuchars).


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 23, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And what exactly did that achieve?

Apart from identifying them as Russian A/c in International air Space.

rUK will be able to continue to do so from wherever it moves the Typhoons to after Lossiemouth (after Leuchars).
		
Click to expand...

Do believe the "Military Planes" where unidentified and moving towards UK airspace so they scrambled the fighters to visually identify them and then ensure they didnt go into UK airpace without authorisation 

Its regular occurence

We are also currently shadowing a russian navy ship as it goes close to UK waters.

And yes we will do if the planes/ships approach UK airspace/waters - but what if its Scottish waters/airspace


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not even if we ask nicely?
		
Click to expand...

OK!   Pretty please!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 24, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Do you think that by asking the same question/ repeating the same statement a few hundred times (and this isn't the only thread) that eventually people will lose the will to live and agree with you?
		
Click to expand...

It seems that accordingly to polls the majority in Scotland DO agree with me - and I don't think they have lost that will - they just want a bit more positivity from BT.  They are the voters - you saying that they are wrong to ask for that?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 24, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It seems that accordingly to polls the majority in Scotland DO agree with me - and I don't think they have lost that will - they just want a bit more positivity from BT.  They are the voters - you saying that they are wrong to ask for that?
		
Click to expand...

I thought the majority still were going to vote no ?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 24, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I thought the majority still were going to vote no ?
		
Click to expand...

They are - but would still like to hear a bit more positivity from BT.  I guess if you are going to vote NO some might like some positive reasons for doing so rather than just negative reasons for not voting YES


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 24, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			They are - but would still like to hear a bit more positivity from BT.  I guess if you are going to vote NO some might like some positive reasons for doing so rather than just negative reasons for not voting YES
		
Click to expand...

The negative reasons for voting 'Yes' are positive reasons for voting 'No'


----------



## Val (Apr 24, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It seems that accordingly to polls the majority in Scotland DO agree with me - and I don't think they have lost that will - they just want a bit more positivity from BT.  They are the voters - you saying that they are wrong to ask for that?
		
Click to expand...

What polls are these, no one has asked me and many many others I know.


----------



## Val (Apr 24, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			The negative reasons for voting 'Yes' are positive reasons for voting 'No'
		
Click to expand...

I've been saying this here for long enough. All the BT campaign have to do is point to the reasons why YES is a bad idea, that's what they have done ongoing and is their obvious strategy.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 24, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It seems that accordingly to polls the majority in Scotland DO agree with me - and I don't think they have lost that will - they just want a bit more positivity from BT.  They are the voters - you saying that they are wrong to ask for that?
		
Click to expand...

Positivity or clarity?

See below.



SocketRocket said:



			The negative reasons for voting 'Yes' are positive reasons for voting 'No'
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 24, 2014)

Interesting comments on 'Civic Nationalism'

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/23/scottish-independence-civic-nationalism


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 24, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Do believe the "Military Planes" where unidentified and moving towards UK airspace so they scrambled the fighters to visually identify them and then ensure they didnt go into UK airpace without authorisation 

Its regular occurence

We are also currently shadowing a russian navy ship as it goes close to UK waters.

And yes we will do if the planes/ships approach UK airspace/waters - but what if its Scottish waters/airspace
		
Click to expand...

So just being nosey then - nothing actually achieved! All just part of the hugely expensive Chess game called Defence!

Why would rUK care about what happens in Scottish waters? And if they do (as I believe they - selfishly - do) then dialogue between the 2 countries would create protocols for the same sort of thing to happen. 

Simples; little change; nothing to worry about. And the cost for iScotland is only for the times it actually 'uses the service'! And for the elements of defence it actually wants/needs!


----------



## CMAC (Apr 24, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			They are - but would still like to hear a bit more positivity from BT.  *I guess if you are going to vote NO some might like some positive reasons for doing so rather than just negative reasons for not voting YES*

Click to expand...

the positive reason for voting no is no separation- seems pretty simple, not sure what's confusing you (repeatedly) over that


----------



## c1973 (Apr 24, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			..........then dialogue between the 2 countries would create protocols for the same sort of thing to happen. 

Simples; little change; nothing to worry about. And the cost for iScotland is only for the times it actually 'uses the service'! And for the elements of defence it actually wants/needs!
		
Click to expand...

So, it's a case of please England, can you defend our air space/waters.....we'll pay you if you do?

I don't recall Ukraine's neighbours jumping to their defence recently. 

God forbid if wee eck actually achieves his aims. We would be a separate nation, no union, no defence pact, not in NATO (in a lot of peeps opinion) , no one knows what our army , air force and navy would consist of and we would be dependant on England (who have just been told to get Trident out) to protect our interest!!!  
Yep, sounds good to me........

What we have maybe ain't 100% wonderful, but it's better than a lot of countries have, it kinda works and has done for years.

For England read UK,Britain....whatever y'all wanna call it.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 24, 2014)

c1973 said:



			So, it's a case of please England, can you defend our air space/waters.....we'll pay you if you do?

I don't recall Ukraine's neighbours jumping to their defence recently. 

God forbid if wee eck actually achieves his aims. We would be a separate nation, no union, no defence pact, not in NATO (in a lot of peeps opinion) , no one knows what our army , air force and navy would consist of and we would be dependant on England (who have just been told to get Trident out) to protect our interest!!!  
Yep, sounds good to me........

What we have maybe ain't 100% wonderful, but it's better than a lot of countries have, it kinda works and has done for years.

For England read UK,Britain....whatever y'all wanna call it. 

Click to expand...

Never knew Alistair Carmichael posted on here, that's about as lucid as he gets too.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 24, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I am not a YES voter.

I simply think that the BT and Westminster campaign could and should do more to sell Scotland as part of the UK as I think it is a risky game for them just to say "we don't have to as it's up to YES to sell an iScotland"

If BT and Westminster choose not to then so be it - I think it's a mistake.

Polls say voters want a more positive NO message

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/positive-no-message-wanted.23979055

Click to expand...

As I was asked about polls - From 16th April


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 24, 2014)

CMAC said:



			the positive reason for voting no is no separation- seems pretty simple, not sure what's confusing you (repeatedly) over that
		
Click to expand...

Clearly I am not alone in being 'confused'.  Maybe all those 'confused' scots voters really need a good talking to about 'positivity' and what that means in the context of BT


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 24, 2014)

If the positive thing to do for the naesayers is nothing then it does not appear to be working.

Latest polls are very close and the many don't knows [mainly female] are waiting for the last minute. A pretty big 17%.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 24, 2014)

Has anyone met anyone or even heard of a mate of a friend's dad's auntie who knows a guy who works at that little place round the corner that has actually been polled?


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 24, 2014)

c1973 said:



			So, it's a case of please England, can you defend our air space/waters.....we'll pay you if you do?

I don't recall Ukraine's neighbours jumping to their defence recently. 

God forbid if wee eck actually achieves his aims. We would be a separate nation, no union, no defence pact, not in NATO (in a lot of peeps opinion) , no one knows what our army , air force and navy would consist of and we would be dependant on England (who have just been told to get Trident out) to protect our interest!!!  
Yep, sounds good to me........

What we have maybe ain't 100% wonderful, but it's better than a lot of countries have, it kinda works and has done for years.

For England read UK,Britain....whatever y'all wanna call it. 

Click to expand...




Adi2Dassler said:



			Never knew Alistair Carmichael posted on here, that's about as lucid as he gets too.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe not lucid to your blinkered view, or is sarcasm the best you can come up with when someone posts a very valid, albeit, direct point.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Never knew Alistair Carmichael posted on here, that's about as lucid as he gets too.
		
Click to expand...

It seemed perfectly lucid to me. :mmm:

Unlike yourself I won't be making snide comments on your posts :blah::blah::blah: and the unbalanced content contained therein. There's so many it would take too much time.

Beginning to think you could be on their payroll mind you.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 24, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Maybe not lucid to your blinkered view, or is sarcasm the best you can come up with when someone posts a very valid, albeit, direct point.
		
Click to expand...




c1973 said:



			It seemed perfectly lucid to me. :mmm:

Unlike yourself I won't be making snide comments on your posts :blah::blah::blah: and the unbalanced content contained therein. There's so many it would take too much time.

Beginning to think you could be on their payroll mind you.
		
Click to expand...

Well that was easier than I expected.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Well that was easier than I expected.
		
Click to expand...

Go on then, what was easier than you expected.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 24, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Go on then, what was easier than you expected.
		
Click to expand...

He was fishing mate


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 24, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			He was fishing mate
		
Click to expand...

Not convinced.


----------



## c1973 (Apr 24, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			He was fishing mate
		
Click to expand...

He might have been. 

Me? I reckon he just struggles responding without something he's lifted from another site, newspaper etc. Hence, the pithy comments about other folks viewpoint. Takes all sorts though.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 24, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Clearly I am not alone in being 'confused'.  Maybe all those 'confused' scots voters really need a good talking to about 'positivity' and what that means in the context of BT
		
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter if your confused. You don't have a vote.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 24, 2014)

c1973 said:



			So, it's a case of please England, can you defend our air space/waters.....we'll pay you if you do?

I don't recall Ukraine's neighbours jumping to their defence recently. 

God forbid if wee eck actually achieves his aims. We would be a separate nation, no union, no defence pact, not in NATO (in a lot of peeps opinion) , no one knows what our army , air force and navy would consist of and we would be dependant on England (who have just been told to get Trident out) to protect our interest!!!  
Yep, sounds good to me........

What we have maybe ain't 100% wonderful, but it's better than a lot of countries have, it kinda works and has done for years.

For England read UK,Britain....whatever y'all wanna call it. 

Click to expand...

Well can you actually state what iScotland actually needs to be defended against?

Norway and Sweden are similar sized economies and don't have issues with defence, even though they are rather closer to the perceived power to be defended against!


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 24, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well can you actually state what iScotland actually needs to be defended against?

Norway and Sweden are similar sized economies and don't have issues with defence, even though they are rather closer to the perceived power to be defended against!
		
Click to expand...

Let me just pop out to the shed and get my crystal ball.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 24, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well can you actually state what iScotland actually needs to be defended against?

Norway and Sweden are similar sized economies and don't have issues with defence, even though they are rather closer to the perceived power to be defended against!
		
Click to expand...


Norway and Sweden arent looked upon as one the "evil powers connected to the US"

The UK is and Scotland is currently part of that and geographically will still be attached post sept


----------



## c1973 (Apr 24, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well can you actually state what iScotland actually needs to be defended against?

Norway and Sweden are similar sized economies and don't have issues with defence, even though they are rather closer to the perceived power to be defended against!
		
Click to expand...

No, I can't. No one can unless they have a crystal ball. But, I do answer questions that are put to me, if I can, unlike some I've noticed.

"And if they do (as I believe they - selfishly - do) then dialogue between the 2 countries would create protocols for the same sort of thing to happen. 
Simples; little change; nothing to worry about. And the cost for iScotland is only for the times it actually 'uses the service'! And for the elements of defence it actually wants/needs!"

I trust you can substantiate this as you appear to be passing it off as factual? 

Anyway, I have a vote, I've made up my OWN mind how I'll use that vote and look forward to wee eck and his cronies greetin about the result. So, I'll leave the debate to the people who seem to know best but don't actually have a say.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 24, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Anyway, I have a vote, I've made up my OWN mind how I'll use that vote and look forward to wee eck and his cronies greetin about the result. So, I'll leave the debate to the people who seem to know best but don't actually have a say. 

Click to expand...

 :thup:


----------



## Val (Apr 24, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			Has anyone met anyone or even heard of a mate of a friend's dad's auntie who knows a guy who works at that little place round the corner that has actually been polled?
		
Click to expand...

Nope, never met of heard of anyone being polled.

There is only one poll that will matter though


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Apr 24, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Doesn't matter if your confused. You don't have a vote.
		
Click to expand...

You are correct I do not get a vote - but that does not stop me hoping that both sides put forward arguments that enable the votes to be cast on positive recognition of benefits provided if at all possible.  

And so I'm not at all confused and can understand perfectly well that there is a difference between voting NO because you don't fancy YES, and voting NO because you understand the benefits inherent in staying in the UK.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



			.....
"And if they do (as I believe they - selfishly - do) then dialogue between the 2 countries would create protocols for the same sort of thing to happen. 
Simples; little change; nothing to worry about. And the cost for iScotland is only for the times it actually 'uses the service'! And for the elements of defence it actually wants/needs!"

*I trust you can substantiate this as you appear to be passing it off as factual? 
*
...
		
Click to expand...

Read what you quoted again - noting the difference between 'would' and 'will'!


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Norway and Sweden arent looked upon as one the "evil powers connected to the US"

The UK is and Scotland is currently part of that and geographically will still be attached post sept
		
Click to expand...

Well, Norway is a member of Nato. So certainly 'aligned with the Great Satan'.  

And Finland and Sweden are certainly thinking about that too! http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140323/DEFREG01/303230012/Finns-Swedes-Weigh-NATO-Membership


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, Norway is a member of Nato. So certainly 'aligned with the Great Satan'.  

And Finland and Sweden are certainly thinking about that too! http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140323/DEFREG01/303230012/Finns-Swedes-Weigh-NATO-Membership

Click to expand...

You dont really hear of Norway being "in bed with the US" as opposed to the UK.

We are always guilty by association.


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You dont really hear of Norway being "in bed with the US" as opposed to the UK.

We are always guilty by association.
		
Click to expand...

Well being in Nato certainly aligns it towards US. But proximity to Russia almost certainly means that alignment is played down!

What you or I hear is rather irrelevant - and unfortunately rather filtered/biased imo.

And isn't independence all about iScotland taking their own path anyway - though, with membership of Nato proposed, I believe it would be pretty much 'as now' but with no rUK bases and no Nuclear Weapons.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well being in Nato certainly aligns it towards US. But proximity to Russia almost certainly means that alignment is played down!

What you or I hear is rather irrelevant - and unfortunately rather filtered/biased imo.

And isn't independence all about iScotland taking their own path anyway - *though, with membership of Nato proposed, I believe it would be pretty much 'as now' but with no rUK bases and no Nuclear Weapons*.
		
Click to expand...

With the US being a major player in NATO - then i would be amazed if the Nuclear Weapons went anywhere and there would need to be some military presence - they would need to bring something to the table


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			With the US being a major player in NATO - then i would be amazed if the Nuclear Weapons went anywhere and there would need to be some military presence - they would need to bring something to the table
		
Click to expand...

Well, to continue the Norway analogy, Norway refuses to allow Nuclear Weapons to be based in Norway. Sound familiar?  

It is at the forefront of the de-Nuke movement too.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, to continue the Norway analogy, Norway refuses to allow Nuclear Weapons to be based in Norway. Sound familiar?  

It is at the forefront of the de-Nuke movement too.
		
Click to expand...

And Norway currently contribute their airforce and military to NATO - what will Scotland contribute

As for nuclear weapons in Scotland - its a tired old argument now and Scotland isnt Norway

I do wonder ff this is still valid though 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/26/alex-salmond-snp-stance-nato-nuclear-weapons


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And Norway currently contribute their airforce and military to NATO - what will Scotland contribute

As for nuclear weapons in Scotland - its a tired old argument now and Scotland isnt Norway
		
Click to expand...

Not for me to say, but Ships and Troops would be my guess! There's probably a air base or 2 available too!

Nuclear Weapons may be 'tired' but I believe its rather important! And I believe the ditching of the nukes from Faslane/Coulport is deemed rather important in Scotland too. But this was discussed several hundred posts ago.

I suspect the 'softening' is part of Nato committment reality - just like Norway and Denmark. New Zealand banned all nukes and with US not prepared to disclose, US suspended ANZUS obligations to NZ. I guess that a prospective new Nato member with that approach would probably be vetoed/not allowed.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



*Not for me to say, but Ships and Troops would be my guess*! There's probably a air base or 2 available too!

Nuclear Weapons may be 'tired' but I believe its rather important! And I believe the ditching of the nukes from Faslane/Coulport is deemed rather important in Scotland too. But this was discussed several hundred posts ago.

I suspect the 'softening' is part of Nato committment reality - just like Norway and Denmark. New Zealand banned all nukes and with US not prepared to disclose, US suspended ANZUS obligations to NZ. I guess that a prospective new Nato member with that approach would probably be vetoed/not allowed.
		
Click to expand...

What ships and troops do Scotland have ? Yes there maybe a few empty air bases.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What ships and troops do Scotland have ? Yes there maybe a few empty air bases.
		
Click to expand...

Well Scotland did bear the brunt of the recent UK defense cuts. 40% I am told.

I have always believed that NATO was pledged to rid the world of nuclear weapons.


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What ships and troops do Scotland have ? Yes there maybe a few empty air bases.
		
Click to expand...

Just as there will be a sharing of the debt, I'd say there'll be a sharing of the assets. Regiments they already have, including the equipment, plus 10%-ish of the RAF and Navy.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 25, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Just as there will be a sharing of the debt, I'd say there'll be a sharing of the assets. Regiments they already have, including the equipment, plus 10%-ish of the RAF and Navy.
		
Click to expand...

Equipment yes, personnel no.  You can't turn round to people that joined the British Army and say you are now in the Scottish one.  
There are Scottish Infantry Battalions and an Armoured Regiment, the rest of the essential arms and services are not regionally recruited anyway.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Just as there will be a sharing of the debt, I'd say there'll be a sharing of the assets. Regiments they already have, including the equipment, plus 10%-ish of the RAF and Navy.
		
Click to expand...

I dont think it's that easy - what about if the personel want to stay in the current forces ?

What about pensions and pay etc - postings , 

I can't see many wanting to transfer 

If there is an independance then I could see a deal that the current forces "cover" them


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 25, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Just as there will be a sharing of the debt, I'd say there'll be a sharing of the assets. Regiments they already have, including the equipment, plus 10%-ish of the RAF and Navy.
		
Click to expand...

10% of Trident!


----------



## Slab (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I dont think it's that easy - what about if the personel want to stay in the current forces ?

What about pensions and pay etc - postings , 

I can't see many wanting to transfer 

If there is an independance then I could see a deal that the current forces "cover" them
		
Click to expand...

Doubt if anything about the whole process post Independence would be 'easy' but just because it'll be problematic or complex doesn't mean it shouldn't/won't be done though _(the reverse is pretty much the entire No campaign strategy right there) _


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 25, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			10% of Trident!
		
Click to expand...

Trouble maker


----------



## StuartD (Apr 25, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Just as there will be a sharing of the debt, *I'd say there'll be a sharing of the assets*. Regiments they already have, including the equipment, plus 10%-ish of the RAF and Navy.
		
Click to expand...

That cannot be guaranteed. Any military equipment that has any technology designated as ITAR by the US Department of Defence cannot automatically be transferred to IScotland. The US has ITAR transfer agreements with the UK. An  IScotland would need to apply to the US to obtain the same agreements before it could hold any ITAR technology.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 25, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			10% of Trident!
		
Click to expand...

We'll keep the firing pins!


----------



## Hobbit (Apr 25, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			10% of Trident!
		
Click to expand...




Hobbit said:



			Trouble maker 

Click to expand...




FairwayDodger said:



			We'll keep the firing pins! 

Click to expand...

Another trouble maker... right made me chuckle did that.... about time we had a bit of humour in this thread.


----------



## Val (Apr 25, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Another trouble maker... right made me chuckle did that.... about time we had a bit of humour in this thread.
		
Click to expand...

Whats humour?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			We'll keep the firing pins! 

Click to expand...

Doon likes this way of thinking.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

Adi.....I see the lunchtime BBC Radio political discussion was from Port Glasgow....were you there.
Hands up poll at the end had the audience split exactly 50-50 to keep Trident.

Some were saying that there will be a jobs bonanza in the area with the West Coast oil fields.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Some were saying that there will be a jobs bonanza in the area with the West Coast oil fields.
		
Click to expand...

In the waters of Islands that aren't that bothered about being Scottish.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Adi.....I see the lunchtime BBC Radio political discussion was from Port Glasgow....were you there.
Hands up poll at the end had the audience split exactly 50-50 to keep Trident.

Some were saying that there will be a jobs bonanza in the area with the West Coast oil fields.
		
Click to expand...

I heard some of this. Seems early exploration suggested there "might" be oil there but MOD kyboshed further exploration. So, it appears fair to conclude that there "might not" be any/much oil there after all.....?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			In the waters of Islands that aren't that bothered about being Scottish.
		
Click to expand...

I was always led to believe that the population of Arran was mostly English folks. So you could be right there!


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I was always led to believe that the population of Arran was mostly English folks. So you could be right there!
		
Click to expand...

I do apologise, I thought you were referring to the areas around the Hebrides.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

stevie_r said:



			I do apologise, I thought you were referring to the areas around the Hebrides.
		
Click to expand...

Strange people on the outer areas


----------



## SocketRocket (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Strange people on the outer areas 

Click to expand...

Did they come from the Wirral?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Did they come from the Wirral?
		
Click to expand...


Those people aren't allowed out of the Wirral


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Adi.....I see the lunchtime BBC Radio political discussion was from Port Glasgow....were you there.
Hands up poll at the end had the audience split exactly 50-50 to keep Trident.

Some were saying that there will be a jobs bonanza in the area with the West Coast oil fields.
		
Click to expand...

Missed all of this, wifey in hospital for the past week so kinda out the loop.

Find it interesting that port glasgow was only 50/50...I'd expect that area to be more weighted to keeping them, considering the suggestion of mass job losses.Maybe that myth is starting to faulter too.

Yet to be convinced about oil in the west, but it's worth a look.And having been to the outer hebrides quite a bit, the folk I talk to see themselves as Scottish (even the english), much more so than the orkadians


----------



## Foxholer (Apr 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			We'll keep the firing pins! 

Click to expand...

:thup: :clap: :rofl:

As long as they don't glow in the dark!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

I know some of the Stranraer folks were getting all excited about oil a few years ago.
Talking about Loch Ryan being the new Sullum Voe

There was also talk on the radio about Shetland voting independently to stay in the UK if there is a Yes vote.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I know some of the Stranraer folks were getting all excited about oil a few years ago.
Talking about Loch Ryan being the new Sullum Voe

There was also talk on the radio about Shetland voting independently to stay in the UK if there is a Yes vote.
		
Click to expand...

So let me get this right 

IF there is a yes vote - the Shetland want to have another vote to stay in the UK for them ? 

Does that not speak volumes ?


----------



## CMAC (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



*I know some of the Stranraer folks were getting all excited about oil a few years ago.*
Talking about Loch Ryan being the new Sullum Voe

There was also talk on the radio about Shetland voting independently to stay in the UK if there is a Yes vote.
		
Click to expand...

then they got excited about electricity and the horseless carriage!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

CBI what a bunch of clowns.
Fastest attempted U turn in the history of British politics.
These people are supposed to be advisers to British Industry.

Thank you BBC for showing what you stand for.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			CBI what a bunch of clowns.
Fastest attempted U turn in the history of British politics.
These people are supposed to be advisers to British Industry.

Thank you BBC for showing what you stand for.
		
Click to expand...

Eh ? 

Any clues for everyone about what you are talking about ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So let me get this right 

IF there is a yes vote - the Shetland want to have another vote to stay in the UK for them ? 

Does that not speak volumes ?
		
Click to expand...

Phil, Not many folk live on Shetland and their council's oil deal makes them all very rich.
Why would they want to change?


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Eh ? 

Any clues for everyone about what you are talking about ?
		
Click to expand...

Following legal advice, the CBI has asked for it's registration as a 'No' campaigner to be reversed and will therefor not be spending oodles of cash on campaigning for the 'No' cause.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Eh ? 

Any clues for everyone about what you are talking about ?
		
Click to expand...

Oh do keep up!

CBI came out in support for the naesayers a couple of days ago.

It now seems like that decision was made by the person who delivers their milk.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Oh do keep up!

CBI came out in support for the naesayers a couple of days ago.

It now seems like that decision was made by the person who delivers their milk.
		
Click to expand...

Basically more mess then - no surprise

So are Scotland not bothered by Shetland choice ? Or will it be ignored by the yes campaign because "not many people live there"


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Basically more mess then - no surprise

So are Scotland not bothered by Shetland choice ? Or will it be ignored by the yes campaign because "not many people live there"
		
Click to expand...

Probably the same kind of thoughts as the UK towards the Channel Islands


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Probably the same kind of thoughts as the UK towards the Channel Islands
		
Click to expand...


Which thoughts are they towards the Channel Islands ? 

Don't believe the Channel Islands are "ignored"


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27159618

There you go.


----------



## stevie_r (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Probably the same kind of thoughts as the UK towards the Channel Islands
		
Click to expand...

The Channel Islands are not a part of the UK though.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27159618

There you go.
		
Click to expand...

And the little teddy throw about the BBC ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And the little teddy throw about the BBC ?
		
Click to expand...

They suspended their membership. [you obviously didn't read that far.]


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Apr 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They suspended their membership. [you obviously didn't read that far.]
		
Click to expand...

I read that and ? The problem being ?


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well can you actually state what iScotland actually needs to be defended against?

Norway and Sweden are similar sized economies and don't have issues with defence, even though they are rather closer to the perceived power to be defended against!
		
Click to expand...

Norway do not defend themselves alone. Major exercises go on every year in Norway and are NATO partners and Sweden has more heavy armour than Britain.


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 25, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well, to continue the Norway analogy, Norway refuses to allow Nuclear Weapons to be based in Norway. Sound familiar?  

It is at the forefront of the de-Nuke movement too.
		
Click to expand...

I believe it refuses to allow land based nuclear weapons to be based in Norway.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 25, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Norway do not defend themselves alone. Major exercises go on every year in Norway and are NATO partners and Sweden has more heavy armour than Britain.
		
Click to expand...

We have had convoys of Norwegian troops exercising at the Mull of Galloway over the last couple of months.
The Cape Wrath annual  bomb party is also one of NATO's major 'all services' exercises.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Apr 30, 2014)

Nigel Farage's Ukippers 11 points in the lead for the UK European Elections.

Is that not a hell of a boost for Scottish independence?


----------



## Old Skier (Apr 30, 2014)

One of the SNP breaking ranks?


----------



## Val (May 2, 2014)

According to the BBC, Moodys report that Scotland will have a lower credit rating than the rest of the UK following a YES vote.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27247870

https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-Scottish-independence-unlikely-to-have-rating-implications-for-UK--PR_298421

A key quote is this IMO




			"While there are significant uncertainties associated with Scottish arrangements post-independence, an 'A' rating is perhaps the most likely at the outset, but with risks tilted to the downside.
		
Click to expand...

Whilst John Swinney would prefer to uses Standard and Poor's assement.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/209646043/Standard-and-Poor-s-Key-Considerations-For-Rating-An-Independent-Scotland

His quote makes me laugh




			"The Westminster government are just about the last people who should be attempting to make political capital on the issue of credit ratings, given that the No campaign's previous boasts came unstuck when the UK was stripped of its AAA status by international agencies, while other, smaller European nations retained a top rating.
		
Click to expand...

It's not the government saying this John it's the ratings agency. 

More doubt being sown into the YES campaign which is a positive for the NO campaign. 

So who is right?


----------



## Val (May 2, 2014)

Alex Salmond no spouting more nonsense. He'll endear himself to the voters with this article

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/alex-salmond-scotland-is-a-nation-of-drunks-9313434.html




*Alex Salmond: 'Scotland is a nation of drunks'*

The First Minister said drinking culture in Scotland had changed since his youth

Kashmira Gander
Thursday, 1 May 2014

Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond has suggested that Scotland is a â€œnation of drunksâ€ and that he is â€œsignificantlyâ€ concerned by the nationâ€™s relationship with alcohol. 

In an interview with former Labour spin-doctor Alistair Campbell which was published in GQ magazine on Thursday, Mr Salmond explained that apparent drinking problems stemmed from: â€œthe availability of cheap alcohol and the cultural changes that has introduced.â€

â€œWhen we were young we would go out for a drink. People now go out drunk, having drunk cheap booze before. That is social change for the worse,â€ he said.

â€œThen there is something deep about Scotlandâ€™s relationship with alcohol that is about self-image â€“ lack of confidence, maybe, as a nation â€“ and we do have to do something about it.â€

He then went on to defend the Scottish Governmentâ€™s plan to introduce minimum alcohol pricing, which has been criticised by the whisky industry.

â€œI promote whisky,â€ Mr Salmond told Mr Campbell.

â€œI do it on the argument that itâ€™s a quality drink, has a worldwide cachet and that its recent great success in markets like China is about social emulation and authenticity, not cheapness.

"My argument is that if you are promoting it as authentic and of great worth, you cannot promote it from a nation of drunks. Youâ€™ll never be able to say it is healthy and life giving, but you can say itâ€™s authentic and high quality," he said.

Jackson Carlaw, Scottish Conservative health spokesman, told the Telegraph: â€œIt would be offensive to hear from a foreigner, but for our own First Minister to hold these views is simply breath-taking and frankly unacceptable in a national leader.â€

A Scottish Government spokesman said on Wednesday: "In this interview, the First Minister was simply spelling out the clear risks for Scotland as a nation if we do not take radical action to tackle problem drinking".
Read more: Divorcing Scotland could be very costly
Scots warned against playing politics with Glasgow Games
The Scottish referendum is a judgement of both the head and heart

Mr Salmond's comments were published a day after judges at the Court of Session in Edinburgh ruled that a legal challenge by the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) against the SNPâ€™s minimum alcohol pricing plans must be referred to the European Union Court of Justice.

The Alcohol (Minimum Pricing) (Scotland) Act 2012 was passed by Holyrood in June 2012, paving the way for the introduction of a preferred minimum price of 50p per unit.

But the SWA argued that minimum pricing legislation breaches European law.

Its legal bid was rejected by Lord Doherty in May 2013 following an Outer House hearing in the Court of Session in January 2013.

An appeal to the court's Inner House, heard by Lord Eassie, Lord Menzies and Lord Brodie, took place in February.

Excerpts from Mr Salmondâ€™s GQ interview also caused controversy on Sunday, after it was revealed that he admires â€œcertain aspectsâ€ of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

â€œWell, obviously, I don't approve of a range of Russian actions, but I think Putin's more effective than the press he gets, I would have thought, and you can see why he carries support in Russia,â€ Mr Salmond said
		
Click to expand...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 2, 2014)

Except there is more than just a kernal of truth in what he says...


----------



## Val (May 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Except there is more than just a kernal of truth in what he says...
		
Click to expand...

Can't say I disagree entirely, my point being why say it just now when fighting tooth and nail for every vote?


----------



## CMAC (May 2, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Can't say I disagree entirely, my point being why say it just now when fighting tooth and nail for every vote?
		
Click to expand...

because he's no that bright...........


he does fit in the strapline ' you have to be dence to vote independence'............

why are the BT guys not adopting this strapline


----------



## Hobbit (May 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Except there is more than just a kernal of truth in what he says...
		
Click to expand...




Valentino said:



			Can't say I disagree entirely, my point being why say it just now when fighting tooth and nail for every vote?
		
Click to expand...

I think that's a little unfair, and perhaps stereotyping. Up until earlier this year I was in various parts of Scotland every month for the last 10yrs. The sub culture that exists around the fringes of society is in pretty much every country in Europe, and that won't go away whatever a govt tries to do.

Equally, I've found it very pleasent to see the responsible attitude displayed by many, many Scots especially with regards to including their children when out for a meal.

Its nice to see that if you gain indepedence you'll be taking the Nanny state mentallity with you...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 2, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Can't say I disagree entirely, my point being why say it just now when fighting tooth and nail for every vote?
		
Click to expand...

I think he sees it as a vote winner, it is also what he has been saying for the last 4 to 5 years.

Jings the spin doctors are being very selective with their quotes from the old Alisdair Campbell interview.
They seem to be risking the wrath of any don't know voters who do have half a brain.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 6, 2014)

And so the Sunday Herald comes out of the closet they are for YES - with the editorial line (OK - it has been out of the closet for a good while just not made this declaration) 

_â€œScotland is an ancient nation and a modern society. We understand the past, as best we can, and guess at the future. But history is as nothing to the lives of the children being born now, this morning, in the cities, towns and villages of this country.

â€œOn their behalf, we assert a claim to a better, more decent, more just future in which a country's governments will be ruled always by the decisions of its citizens.â€_

But no-one pays attention to newspapers these days so maybe no big deal.


----------



## CMAC (May 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And so the Sunday Herald comes out of the closet they are for YES - with the editorial line (OK - it has been out of the closet for a good while just not made this declaration) 

_â€œScotland is an ancient nation and a modern society. We understand the past, as best we can, and guess at the future. But history is as nothing to the lives of the children being born now, this morning, in the cities, towns and villages of this country.

â€œOn their behalf, we assert a claim to a better, more decent, more just future in which a country's governments will be ruled always by the decisions of its citizens.â€_

But no-one pays attention to newspapers these days so maybe no big deal.
		
Click to expand...

so they are just quoting what a democracy should be Thought we lived in one in the UK!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 6, 2014)

I see Wasteminster have allowed Scottish devolution from the 'bedroom tax' bill.

Everyone seems quiet on that one.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I see Wasteminster have allowed Scottish devolution from the 'bedroom tax' bill.

Everyone seems quiet on that one.
		
Click to expand...

Which is interesting as Social Security and Benefits are reserved powers whereas housing is devolved.  So a grey area becoming more devolved it appears - though how that is taken into consideration with other reserved benefits an individual might receive I don't know.  Rather looks like Scots who would have lost benefit (from Westminster) through having 'extra' bedrooms no longer will.


----------



## Old Skier (May 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Which is interesting as Social Security and Benefits are reserved powers whereas housing is devolved.  So a grey area becoming more devolved it appears - though how that is taken into consideration with other reserved benefits an individual might receive I don't know.  Rather looks like Scots who would have lost benefit (from Westminster) through having 'extra' bedrooms no longer will.
		
Click to expand...

The extra room issues was always devolved down to local authorities to decide who pays and who doesn't so no change there then. Shame people don't know that and are happy blaming the government.


----------



## Val (May 6, 2014)

Interesting statement from the CEO of Aberdeen asset management Martin Gilbert who suggested companies who took a position faced "quite a lot of resentment"

I've said it all along on this thread, there are major companies scared to show their hand but they will in time I'm sure.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 6, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			The extra room issues was always devolved down to local authorities to decide who pays and who doesn't so no change there then. Shame people don't know that and are happy blaming the government.
		
Click to expand...


Are you sure about that?
Why would the government issue a statement if that was the case.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 6, 2014)

Yup
Scottish government has funded the bill but the Con/Dems have now binned it for Scotland.
Power to ra peeple.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-given-power-to-end-bedroom-tax-9320374.html


----------



## Old Skier (May 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Are you sure about that?
Why would the government issue a statement if that was the case.
		
Click to expand...

I am not sure about Scotland but it has always been open to appeal in England giving the local authorities discretion as to whether they implement or not.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 7, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I am not sure about Scotland but it has always been open to appeal in England giving the local authorities discretion as to whether they implement or not.
		
Click to expand...

I think that is like Scotland, provided that they can fund that choice out of their existing budgets.


----------



## Old Skier (May 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think that is like Scotland, provided that they can fund that choice out of their existing budgets.
		
Click to expand...

Cheers, just was not sure if it was also devolved down to local authority level.


----------



## CMAC (May 8, 2014)

UK Businesses fear Scottish Independence.

1 in 5 Scottish companies would consider moving away if independent

10% would consider moving away.

8% said they Definitely would move away

http://www.hiltonbaird.co.uk/Busine...c+dPokWtpMx+woj96NmF6dy6wsWd8tYoFd6jcrMkw7qU7


----------



## Foxholer (May 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			The extra room issues was always devolved down to local authorities to decide who pays and who doesn't so no change there then. Shame people don't know that and are happy blaming the government.
		
Click to expand...

Tosh!

That's the sort of spin worthy of a Press Secretary!

Given that the 'Bedroom Tax' was introduced by an Act of Parliament - The Welfare Reform Act 2012 - it is entirely the Government's 'fault'. Any devolution/delegation to LAs is purely as an implementation method!

So any blame (or credit) should be squarely aimed at the instigator - the Government!


----------



## Old Skier (May 8, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Tosh!

That's the sort of spin worthy of a Press Secretary!

Given that the 'Bedroom Tax' was introduced by an Act of Parliament - The Welfare Reform Act 2012 - it is entirely the Government's 'fault'. Any devolution/delegation to LAs is purely as an implementation method!

So any blame (or credit) should be squarely aimed at the instigator - the Government!
		
Click to expand...

Blame who you like. I only deal in facts.  True the the Governement introduced the legislation (don't remember any tax legislation on a bedroom though) and the same legislation gave local authorities the descretion after appeal on who to help or ignore but as this is about Scottish Independance perhaps this is the wrong place to debate this.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Blame who you like. I only deal in facts.  True the the Governement introduced the legislation (don't remember any tax legislation on a bedroom though) and the same legislation gave local authorities the descretion after appeal on who to help or ignore but as this is about Scottish Independance perhaps this is the wrong place to debate this.
		
Click to expand...

Not really, we are still smarting about being guinea pigs for the Poll Tax.
Bedroom tax was introduced to solve a specific London based problem. It does not switch to places like Dundee, Truro or Morecombe.


----------



## Hacker Khan (May 8, 2014)

I realise this thread has had over 2000 replies and I have not contributed to it yet so I feel left out.  So can I say I am English but I really like some Scottish bands like The Blue Nile, Mogwai and The Manic Street Preachers. Not a great deal else to add to the debate.


----------



## Old Skier (May 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not really, we are still smarting about being guinea pigs for the Poll Tax.
Bedroom tax was introduced to solve a specific London based problem. It does not switch to places like Dundee, Truro or Morecombe.
		
Click to expand...

Poll Tax - funny that. Still used down here and half those that mention it wern't even born when it was in use.  Shows how one bad policy can stick for life.

Not sure why you feel its a problem specific to London. On the other side, how many builders these days build one bed properties.  Another own goal in the eyes of some.


----------



## Val (May 8, 2014)

CMAC said:



			UK Businesses fear Scottish Independence.

1 in 5 Scottish companies would consider moving away if independent

10% would consider moving away.

8% said they Definitely would move away

http://www.hiltonbaird.co.uk/Busine...c+dPokWtpMx+woj96NmF6dy6wsWd8tYoFd6jcrMkw7qU7

Click to expand...

That is not a surprise


----------



## CMAC (May 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			That is not a surprise
		
Click to expand...

I saw the Herald on Sunday published 100 companies that *WANT* independence..............


----------



## c1973 (May 8, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			I realise this thread has had over 2000 replies and I have not contributed to it yet so I feel left out.  So can I say I am English but I really like some Scottish bands like The Blue Nile, Mogwai and The Manic Street Preachers. Not a great deal else to add to the debate. 

Click to expand...


Manic Street Preachers, Scottish???? 

Welsh methinks. 

You might be thinking of the Wee Free Preachers.


----------



## Hacker Khan (May 8, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Manic Street Preachers, Scottish???? 

Welsh methinks. 

You might be thinking of the Wee Free Preachers. 

Click to expand...

Really???  I just heard them on TV and couldn't understand a word they were saying so I assumed they were Scottish. Oh well, every day's a school day....


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 8, 2014)

c1973 said:



			You might be thinking of the Wee Free Preachers. 

Click to expand...

The Wee Frees, what a great soul band they are.

Manics....was one of their songs not called....... I'm So Glad I'm Not English?


----------



## Val (May 8, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I saw the Herald on Sunday published 100 companies that *WANT* independence..............
		
Click to expand...

Is that all


----------



## c1973 (May 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The Wee Frees, what a great soul band they are.
		
Click to expand...

Aye,they play with such fire...................and brimstone.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Is that all 

Click to expand...

Well it beats your 2% of 10% by a bit I would think!!


----------



## c1973 (May 8, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			Really???  I just heard them on TV and *couldn't understand a word they were saying so I assumed they were Scottish.* Oh well, every day's a school day....
		
Click to expand...

Aye, whatever!


----------



## Val (May 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well it beats your 2% of 10% by a bit I would think!!
		
Click to expand...

2% of 10% of what?


----------



## Old Skier (May 8, 2014)

And the Scotsman pops up
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...ion-would-have-dollarisation-effect-1-3402979


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			2% of 10% of what?
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, got you muddled with Cmacs posted figures of companies leaving Scotland


----------



## Val (May 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Sorry, got you muddled with Cmacs posted figures of companies leaving Scotland
		
Click to expand...

Nae probs


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			And the Scotsman pops up
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...ion-would-have-dollarisation-effect-1-3402979

Click to expand...

For Info....no Joke.
The Hootsmon has the same circulation figures as the Potters Bar and Barnet Times.

Not a paper to be taken seriously.


----------



## Old Skier (May 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			For Info....no Joke.
The Hootsmon has the same circulation figures as the Potters Bar and Barnet Times.

Not a paper to be taken seriously.
		
Click to expand...

I don't take any of them seriously but these days circulation figures mean naff all due to tinternet.


----------



## Foxholer (May 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Blame who you like. I only deal in facts.  True the the Governement introduced the legislation (don't remember any tax legislation on a bedroom though) and the same legislation gave local authorities the descretion after appeal on who to help or ignore but as this is about Scottish Independance perhaps this is the wrong place to debate this.
		
Click to expand...

You are, however, extremely selective about which facts though! So still spinning!

I understand - not 100% certain - that while there is an 'out' via appeal, subsequent discretionary assistance is at the devolved authority's cost. The Scottish Government is actually covering that cost in Scotland btw. The 'Bedroom Tax' (note the quotes!) - spun, unsuccessfully, by IDS as 'spare bedroom subsidy' - is one of the examples jumped on by the Scottish nationalists as inappropriate to Scotland and part of the reason why Scotland should be independent - so quite relevant to a Scottish Independence debate!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 8, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			You are, however, extremely selective about which facts though! So still spinning!

I understand - not 100% certain - that while there is an 'out' via appeal, subsequent discretionary assistance is at the devolved authority's cost. The Scottish Government is actually covering that cost in Scotland btw. The 'Bedroom Tax' (note the quotes!) - spun, unsuccessfully, by IDS as 'spare bedroom subsidy' - is one of the examples jumped on by the Scottish nationalists as inappropriate to Scotland and part of the reason why Scotland should be independent - so quite relevant to a Scottish Independence debate!
		
Click to expand...

Quite agree.
It is a big + for the yes voters.
That is why Westminster did their U turn.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (May 8, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			You are, however, extremely selective about which facts though! So still spinning!

I understand - not 100% certain - that while there is an 'out' via appeal, subsequent discretionary assistance is at the devolved authority's cost. The Scottish Government is actually covering that cost in Scotland btw. The 'Bedroom Tax' (note the quotes!) - spun, unsuccessfully, by IDS as 'spare bedroom subsidy' - is one of the examples jumped on by the Scottish nationalists as inappropriate to Scotland and part of the reason why Scotland should be independent - so quite relevant to a Scottish Independence debate!
		
Click to expand...

By constantly referring to it as the"Bedroom Tax", irrespective of the use of quotes, you are equally guilty of spinning.

One of the oldest tricks in political PR is to excuse oneself by claiming to be merely quoting another source.


----------



## Old Skier (May 8, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			You are, however, extremely selective about which facts though! So still spinning!

I understand - not 100% certain - !
		
Click to expand...

Central Government does supply a small pot of gold to local authorities to cover successful appeals.

Don't get me wrong, dealing with people on a voluntary basis I do meet some who have a legitimate need for a room that is neither spare or not required due to illness but unfortunately because of the attitude of some, the policy is an easy target to get plenty of backing from your average citizen.

Im sure giving in on this issue, whether it's SNP or any other party, would secure votes for most hair brained schemes.

Not sure where I am being selective with the facts, I just indicated that there is no legislation covering a spare bedroom tax.


----------



## Foxholer (May 8, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			By constantly referring to it as the"Bedroom Tax", irrespective of the use of quotes, you are equally guilty of spinning.

One of the oldest tricks in political PR is to excuse oneself by claiming to be merely quoting another source.
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps. But The Community Charge just doesn't seem to have quite the same impact (negative or positive) as Poll Tax.

In future, I shall try to call it by its slightly more official name - 'under-occupancy penalty'! Of course, it only uses the number of Bedrooms, so the popularisation is pretty apt imo. Though maybe the Beeb's approach is better '.... bedroom tax/spare room subsidy/under-occupancy penalty (delete as appropriate)...'!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 26, 2014)

About 30% UKIP share of vote in European elections suggests some MPs for UKIP in next Westminster GenElect and at same time a reduction in Conservative MPs suggests a Tory/UKIP coalition.  Now that's an attractive prospect for Scottish voters to ponder when it comes to September 18th.


----------



## ger147 (May 27, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			About 30% UKIP share of vote in European elections suggests some MPs for UKIP in next Westminster GenElect and at same time a reduction in Conservative MPs suggests a Tory/UKIP coalition.  Now that's an attractive prospect for Scottish voters to ponder when it comes to September 18th.
		
Click to expand...

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27575204


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 27, 2014)

ger147 said:



http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27575204

Click to expand...

...and...?

I am quite aware that UKIP now have a MEP in Scotland (10% of Scottish vote).  I was talking about Westminster and a Tory/UKIP coalition government.  Anyway go ahead and tell me that that would be welcomed by most Scots voters and that it won't be an issue that they'll consider.


----------



## c1973 (May 27, 2014)

UKIP vote will probably go down at the general election, bear in mind that's a first past the post system as well, no PR there. I reckon there is more chance of a Labour/ Others coalition tbh.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 27, 2014)

UKIP won't win a single seat at next years GE. England have used the Euro elections to make a point.No way they'll do that for Westminster.And given the % of turnout all over The UK I'm even less bothered.

The only thing that bothers me is the insanely disproportionate level of media coverage they get.If the Green party got the same level of media time they'd trounce UKIP.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (May 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The only thing that bothers me is the insanely disproportionate level of media coverage they get.If the Green party got the same level of media time they'd trounce UKIP.
		
Click to expand...

Very much this.

I believe I saw graphs showing that UKIP actually declined in votes (can't actually remember where, so I may be mistaken), but the Green party get little to no airtime, annoying. I'm not a green supporter, but would like to see more of them in the news!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 27, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Very much this.

I believe I saw graphs showing that UKIP actually declined in votes (can't actually remember where, so I may be mistaken), but the Green party get little to no airtime, annoying. I'm not a green supporter, but would like to see more of them in the news!
		
Click to expand...

I hope that you are right and that UKIP don't win any Westminster seats - but it is a possibility.  And they do get an absurd amount of publicity for what their support amounts to and the influence that they actually have.  

Many Scottish NO voters will have to take a punt on a Tory/UKIP coalition not happening - or indeed deciding whether or not they'd be bothered if it did.  Best thing cameron could do at the moment for BT would be to shut up about UKIP and stop 'bigging them up'


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 27, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Many Scottish NO voters will have to take a punt on a Tory/UKIP coalition not happening - or indeed deciding whether or not they'd be bothered if it did.  Best thing cameron could do at the moment for BT would be to shut up about UKIP and stop 'bigging them up'
		
Click to expand...

Not saying you're wrong on this but it's fairly depressing to think that this huge decision could boil down to such a short term issue such as fear over who might make up the next government. It's not even relevant, in my book, and I'd hate a tory/ukip government as much as anyone else in the country.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (May 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			UKIP won't win a single seat at next years GE. England have used the Euro elections to make a point.No way they'll do that for Westminster.And given the % of turnout all over The UK I'm even less bothered.

The only thing that bothers me is the insanely disproportionate level of media coverage they get.If the Green party got the same level of media time they'd trounce UKIP.
		
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree with your assessment of UKIP's chances in the General Election I would have to disagree with your opinion of the Greens' chances.

They could have all the publicity they want and Joe Public still would not be interested in their policies. Folks vote with their wallets not their principles.


----------



## c1973 (May 27, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Not saying you're wrong on this but it's fairly depressing to think that this huge decision could boil down to such a short term issue such as fear over who might make up the next government. It's not even relevant, in my book, and I'd hate a tory/ukip government as much as anyone else in the country.
		
Click to expand...

This.

It's blatant 'scaremongering' to use a possible short term coalition of Tory UKIP in the next government as a reason to vote yes. Or to use more of the yes camp parlance, 'simply not true' 'That's nonsense' 'we don't believe that' blatantly untrue' 'sorry but we disagree' and all the other positive (?) sound bites they use.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 27, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and...?

I am quite aware that UKIP now have a MEP in Scotland (10% of Scottish vote).  I was talking about Westminster and a Tory/UKIP coalition government.  Anyway go ahead and tell me that that would be welcomed by most Scots voters and that it won't be an issue that they'll consider.
		
Click to expand...


What Tory/UKIP coalition government ? - no such thing and it won't ever happen


----------



## Val (May 27, 2014)

Cost of setting up independant Scotland could top Â£1.5bn, no doubt Salmond will put his spin on it saying it's nonsense and won't back it up why.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-referendum-cost-of-setting-up-independent-scotland-could-be-15bn-claims-treasury-9434222.html




			Oliver Wright
Monday, 26 May 2014

The cost of setting up an independent Scottish state could be as much as Â£1.5bn, the Treasury claimed yesterday, prompting another fierce row with Alex Salmond.

In an official paper to be published on Wednesday, the UK Government will say the one-off cost of replicating about 180 public bodies currently combined with England, Wales and Northern Ireland could amount to Â£600 per household.

Whitehallâ€™s analysis has also put the cost of a new benefit system at Â£400m and of setting up a new tax system at up to Â£562m. It challenged the First Minister to put his own price on an Scottish independent state so that voters could make an â€œinformed choiceâ€ in Septemberâ€™s referendum.

But Mr Salmond described the Treasury analysis as flawed and called for it to be withdrawn. â€œThe Treasury are either guilty of a horrendous blunder, or it is a deliberate and deeply dishonest attempt to deceive â€“ either way, it leaves the Treasuryâ€™s analysis without a shred of credibility, and they should withdraw this misleading claim,â€ he said.

A spokesman for Scotlandâ€™s Finance Secretary, John Swinney, added: â€œMuch of the infrastructure needed for an independent country already exists, and Scottish taxpayers already pay their fair share for all devolved and reserved services â€“ while Scotland  also stands to inherit a fair share of joint assets, valued  at about 1.3 trillion dollars.â€ The Treasury analysis looks at the costs of creating a new state and considers research by the Institute for Government, the London School of Economics and Canadian professor Robert Young.

His research, based on Quebec setting up a new state, estimates it could cost up to 1 per cent of a countryâ€™s GDP to establish the new systems required to run a newly independent state. In Scotlandâ€™s case, 1 per cent of its GDP would see taxpayers face a Â£1.5bn tax bill â€“ equivalent to Â£600 per household, the Treasury said.

The IfG and the LSE have published independent analysis that puts the average cost of setting up a new policy department at Â£15m. Applying this figure to 180 new departments for Scotland totals Â£2.7bn.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 27, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Whilst I agree with your assessment of UKIP's chances in the General Election I would have to disagree with your opinion of the Greens' chances.

They could have all the publicity they want and Joe Public still would not be interested in their policies. Folks vote with their wallets not their principles.
		
Click to expand...

I was meaning in Euro elections,not GEs.And it would appear that folk ignore their wallets and act very much on principles if the euro results are an indicator.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 27, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Cost of setting up independant Scotland could top Â£1.5bn, no doubt Salmond will put his spin on it saying it's nonsense and won't back it up why.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-referendum-cost-of-setting-up-independent-scotland-could-be-15bn-claims-treasury-9434222.html

Click to expand...

Â£1.5B sounds a fair number.Not sure why anyone would debate this, and lets be honest, in the grand scheme of things, it's not that much.


----------



## Hobbit (May 27, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Cost of setting up independant Scotland could top Â£1.5bn, no doubt Salmond will put his spin on it saying it's nonsense and won't back it up why.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-referendum-cost-of-setting-up-independent-scotland-could-be-15bn-claims-treasury-9434222.html

Click to expand...




Adi2Dassler said:



			Â£1.5B sounds a fair number.Not sure why anyone would debate this, and lets be honest, in the grand scheme of things, it's not that much.
		
Click to expand...

Its a pity Alex Salmond didn't use the opportunity to quote numbers/costs rther than just saying the Treasury should withdraw the statement. Just made him look a tadge weak...


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 27, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Its a pity Alex Salmond didn't use the opportunity to quote numbers/costs rther than just saying the Treasury should withdraw the statement. Just made him look a tadge weak...
		
Click to expand...

That is the strategy, I'm afraid, bluff and bluster. Attack anyone who expresses any opinion with a negative slant on independence.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Â£1.5B sounds a fair number.Not sure why anyone would debate this, and lets be honest, in the grand scheme of things, it's not that much.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly what I thought, complete non story.
It is a two way cost remember so when the percentages add up it will not be too much for Scotland.

I am beginning to lose faith in Treasury statements, they should be impartial at this time. Whiffs of desperation


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 27, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			That is the strategy, I'm afraid, bluff and bluster. Attack anyone who expresses any opinion with a negative slant on independence.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe the figures are wrong?I dunno.But spending money on infrastructure projects isn't really a negative, is it?Maybe Eck is gonna tell us it'll cost Â£2billion?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Maybe the figures are wrong?I dunno.But spending money on infrastructure projects isn't really a negative, is it?Maybe Eck is gonna tell us it'll cost Â£2billion?
		
Click to expand...

.....and just think of all the new former London based jobs it will create.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			.....and just think of all the new former London based jobs it will create.
		
Click to expand...

I'd be looking to share that round the country...Dumfries/Perth/Dunfie...these places should have their fare share of the new jobs, not just Edinburgh.


----------



## Hobbit (May 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Â£1.5B sounds a fair number.Not sure why anyone would debate this, and lets be honest, in the grand scheme of things, it's not that much.
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			Exactly what I thought, complete non story.
It is a two way cost remember so when the percentages add up it will not be too much for Scotland.

I am beginning to lose faith in Treasury statements, they should be impartial at this time. Whiffs of desperation
		
Click to expand...

But how do you know they're wrong? Surely the question you should be asking is are those figures right? Or would you prefer to live in blissful ignorance of the (possible)truth if it eminates from south of the border?


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I am beginning to lose faith in Treasury statements, they should be impartial at this time. Whiffs of desperation
		
Click to expand...

I have no way of knowing the veracity of these or any other figures the treasury produces. However, in principle, it is possible to reveal figures that are negative for the independence case and still be impartial. 

Are you suggesting that anyone with any facts or figures that go against independence should just keep quiet?


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Maybe the figures are wrong?I dunno.But spending money on infrastructure projects isn't really a negative, is it?Maybe Eck is gonna tell us it'll cost Â£2billion?
		
Click to expand...

It is if it's money to replicate infrastructure that we already have within the UK. i.e. if it's money that only needs to be spent if we go for independence and could otherwise have been spent on something entirely different.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 27, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			But how do you know they're wrong? Surely the question you should be asking is are those figures right? Or would you prefer to live in blissful ignorance of the (possible)truth if it eminates from south of the border?
		
Click to expand...

I'm not doubting the figure...it seems reasonable to me.I'm questioning why eck is questioning it, maybe he thinks (and has evidence) that it less (or more) capital expenditure in creating a new nation is a + thing, job creation/construction work, the spread of governmental bodies around the country involving folk in the process of nation building.Cheap at twice the price of Â£1.5Billion.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 27, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I have no way of knowing the veracity of these or any other figures the treasury produces. However, in principle, it is possible to reveal figures that are negative for the independence case and still be impartial. 

Are you suggesting that anyone with any facts or figures that go against independence should just keep quiet?
		
Click to expand...

That's the problem the figures are so one sided that you do question them.
There are many experts saying an independent Scotland is viable, non from the treasury though!
Bear in mind a percentage of these treasury experts will lose their jobs if Scotland go independent.

Starting with the MP's


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That's the problem the figures are so one sided that you do question them.
There are many experts saying an independent Scotland is viable, non from the treasury though!
Bear in mind a percentage of these treasury experts will lose their jobs if Scotland go independent.
		
Click to expand...

What are the figures from Salmond ?


----------



## SocketRocket (May 27, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What Tory/UKIP coalition government ? - no such thing and it won't ever happen
		
Click to expand...

And what makes you think that?

You have seen that a great number of people in the country want change and are dissatisfied with the way the EU affects the running of our country.    Unless the Conservatives or Labour are prepared to face up to what the electorate wants  and create policies that address these concerns then UKIP may well gain parliamentary seats in the next election and these seats could be the ones that decide who becomes the government.    Just like the Lib Dems did last time.

To write them off is IMO a mistake.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 27, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What are the figures from Salmond ?
		
Click to expand...

Klazon......Nobody knows.

Negotiable of course.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 27, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			And what makes you think that?

You have seen that a great number of people in the country want change and are dissatisfied with the EU affects the way our country is run.    Unless the Conservatives or Labour are prepared to face up to what the electorate wants  and create policies that address these concerns then UKIP may well gain parliamentary seats in the next election and these seats could be the ones that decide who becomes the government.    Just like the Lib Dems did last time.
		
Click to expand...

Because I believe it was more a "protest" vote and when it came down to a GE UKIP will actually struggle to gain any seats let alone enough to get a chance of coalition - but we will find out next year I guess


----------



## SocketRocket (May 27, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Because I believe it was more a "protest" vote and when it came down to a GE UKIP will actually struggle to gain any seats let alone enough to get a chance of coalition - but we will find out next year I guess
		
Click to expand...

Dont underestimate the power of the quiet man voting against his life being changed without his permission.


----------



## c1973 (May 27, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



*Dont underestimate the power of the *quiet man voting against his life being changed without his permission.
		
Click to expand...


For a second there I thought Darth Vader had entered the debate. Tailed off a bit though.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 27, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It is if it's money to replicate infrastructure that we already have within the UK. i.e. if it's money that only needs to be spent if we go for independence and could otherwise have been spent on something entirely different.
		
Click to expand...

Or if it's the cost of setting up an infrastructure, systems and services from scratch - which clearly Scotland wouldn't be doing.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 27, 2014)

So the Whitehall statement on the set up costs for a new Scotland were base don London School of Economics data,yes?

Well, it would seem that the LSE  contradict the spin applied to their numbers...

https://twitter.com/PJDunleavy

I wonder if this will get the same type of coverage from the MSM.....


----------



## Val (May 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Exactly what I thought, complete non story.
It is a two way cost remember so when the percentages add up it will not be too much for Scotland.

I am beginning to lose faith in Treasury statements, they should be impartial at this time. Whiffs of desperation
		
Click to expand...

Ok, why is it a non story?

Also where does this spare cash come from?


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So the Whitehall statement on the set up costs for a new Scotland were base don London School of Economics data,yes?

Well, it would seem that the LSE  contradict the spin applied to their numbers...

https://twitter.com/PJDunleavy

I wonder if this will get the same type of coverage from the MSM.....
		
Click to expand...

It's behind a paywall...... so probably not! :ears:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 28, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Ok, why is it a non story?

Also where does this spare cash come from?
		
Click to expand...

There is always spare cash around, look how much of it the UK government spent on the Somerset levels this winter.
Non story as it was always going to happen if Scotland won independence.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 28, 2014)

Scottish independence: New claims on economic outcome


The UK and Scottish governments are vigorously arguing for their own projections of the consequences of independence

Contrasting claims about the costs and benefits of Scottish independence are to be put to voters.

The Scottish government will argue that independence could bring about an economic bonus worth Â£2,000 for each household.

The UK government will say that keeping the Union will ensure a dividend for everyone in Scotland.

Treasury ministers are preparing to publish their costing of the White Paper plans for independence.

The challenges it has identified for an independent Scotland include an ageing population, declining oil revenues and the potential for higher interest rates.

The Treasury analysis will be published by Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander.

Mr Alexander told the BBC's Scotland 2014 programme: "One of the frustrations here is that the nationalist government has not set out any costs at all of setting up a new state - they seem to assume it's free.

"Just like they seem to assume that you can get all the oil out of the North Sea for free, just as they seem to think that they can get away with trying to bamboozle people to vote for independence on the basis of numbers that simply don't add up - on oil revenues, on set up costs, on tax and on spending."

The Scottish government has rejected the view that the costs of independence are greater than the benefits.

'Benefits of wealth'

First Minister Alex Salmond said: "The reality is Scotland is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, more prosperous per head than the UK, France and Japan, but we need the powers of independence to ensure that that wealth properly benefits everyone in our society."

The Scotland Office has said the paper will show "there is a significant benefit for each and every Scottish man, woman and child as part of the union".

The Scottish government has claimed that the Treasury calculations rest on a misinterpretation of research carried out by the London School of Economics (LSE).

LSE academic Patrick Dunleavy posted on his Twitter account: "UK Treasury press release on #Scotland costs of government badly misrepresents LSE research."

Mr Salmond added: "This is a devastating verdict on the Treasury's figures from one of the authors of the report they have been using to base their work on.

"And it totally undermines everything they have to say this week about the finances of an independent Scotland."

Mr Alexander said the figures on start-up costs were based on research by Professor Robert Young from Canada.

*UK assets*

The Scotland Office has questioned claims from the Scottish government that an independent Scotland would be entitled to a share of UK assets.

A spokesman said: "John Swinney now seems to have reduced his independence dream to an episode of Cash in the Attic.

"His financial plan for independence now hinges on how much he might be able to get for 'Scotland's share' of the UK Embassy in Tokyo or the new HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier.

"In private, Mr Swinney told his Cabinet colleagues that it would cost Â£600m a year for an independent Scotland to set up one government department to collect tax. He should now tell everyone in Scotland what the total bill for independence would be."


----------



## Old Skier (May 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			There is always spare cash around
		
Click to expand...

Sounds like a basis for Scotish economics. Not sure how wee eek is able to produce any further figures because until negotiations have started how does he know what assets are going to be passed on or what will be charged by RUK for services that he may wish to buy into.  
I accept that the guppyment figures are most probably worst case.

On another point. It appears there are more Scots and Nigerians living south of the border and have chosen the high capacity ground of FULHAM to play a game of kiss ball. I presume the betting scam came to light when so much money went on Nigeria to lose.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 28, 2014)

So Danny Boy has produced a report that is negative towards independence.

The fact that he will be unemployed if Scotland become independent does not see to have been considered.


----------



## Old Skier (May 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So Danny Boy has produced a report that is negative towards independence.

The fact that he will be unemployed if Scotland become independent does not see to have been considered.
		
Click to expand...

So once again the argument is that it's negative so it's wrong. Great strap line.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 28, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			So once again the argument is that it's negative so it's wrong. Great strap line.
		
Click to expand...

Keep swallowing the 'yes minister' line if you wish. I don't buy it.

Everything that has come out of the UK treasury is negative towards an independent Scotland, do you not question that.

There are many reports that suggest Scotland will be richer outside of the UK


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Keep swallowing the 'yes minister' line if you wish. I don't buy it.

Everything that has come out of the UK treasury is negative towards an independent Scotland, do you not question that.

There are many reports that suggest Scotland will be richer outside of the UK
		
Click to expand...


So because it's negative toward and independent Scotland it's wrong ?

Which reports suggest Scotland will be richer ? Who are they from and do they contain figures ?


----------



## c1973 (May 28, 2014)

Every report from the yes campaign is positive to an independent Scotland, do you not question that Doon?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Everything that has come out of the UK treasury is negative towards an independent Scotland, do you not question that.
		
Click to expand...




c1973 said:



			Every report from the yes campaign is positive to an independent Scotland, do you not question that Doon?
		
Click to expand...

And here in lies the problem.Neither side are prepared to accept that the other lot_ might_ be right occasionally.

It's really quite small time thinking from both when it comes to nation building.


----------



## c1973 (May 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			And here in lies the problem.Neither side are prepared to accept that the other lot_ might_ be right occasionally.

It's really quite small time thinking from both when it comes to nation building.
		
Click to expand...

Now there's something I agree with.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			And here in lies the problem.Neither side are prepared to accept that the other lot_ might_ be right occasionally.

It's really quite small time thinking from both when it comes to nation building.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe because it's not really expected to happen from either side and isn't being taken very serious by the majority ?


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 28, 2014)

One thing (of many) that I don't understand is how they break these down....

So, Danny Alexander says every Scottish citizen will be Â£1400 better off by staying in the Union. And Salmond et al have previously said (something along the lines of) we'd all be Â£1000 better off in an independent Scotland.

Now, I don't believe that I personally will be any better or worse off either way. How on earth are they coming up with these figures and what do they really mean?


----------



## c1973 (May 28, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			One thing (of many) that I don't understand is how they break these down....

So, Danny Alexander says every Scottish citizen will be Â£1400 better off by staying in the Union. And Salmond et al have previously said (something along the lines of) we'd all be Â£1000 better off in an independent Scotland.

Now, I don't believe that I personally will be any better or worse off either way. How on earth are they coming up with these figures and what do they really mean?
		
Click to expand...

I'm not 100% sure, but it's not cash in your pocket as such, it's a combination of taxation levels and how much cash is spent per head of population on public services, NHS etc. 

For example, higher taxation + less public spending = you being x amount worse off. Think that's what it means.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 28, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Maybe because it's not really expected to happen from either side and isn't being taken very serious by the majority ?
		
Click to expand...

Aye, that'll be it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Aye, that'll be it.
		
Click to expand...

But how can the status quo make me any better off? - the status quo is the status quo.  A change might make be better or worse off but with the status quo I remain as I am - neither better nor worse off than before.


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But how can the status quo make me any better off? - the status quo is the status quo.  A change might make be better or worse off but with the status quo I remain as I am - neither better nor worse off than before.
		
Click to expand...

It's spin, Hogan. We are Â£1400 better off in the union is the positive way of saying we'll be Â£1400 worse off if we leave.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 28, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			One thing (of many) that I don't understand is how they break these down....

So, Danny Alexander says every Scottish citizen will be Â£1400 better off by staying in the Union. And Salmond et al have previously said (something along the lines of) we'd all be Â£1000 better off in an independent Scotland.

Now, I don't believe that I personally will be any better or worse off either way. How on earth are they coming up with these figures and what do they really mean?
		
Click to expand...

I agree - besides - over what timescales. Immediately (chance would be a fine thing); 1yr, 2yrs, 10yrs?

All this bandying about of better or worse off figures from both sides of the argument is IMO dancing on a pin-head, an irrelevance and a distraction from the real issues, benefits and pitfalls.  

It's a bit like telling me I should switch power supplier as I'll Â£500 better off - then I discover that that figure is over 5 years - so Â£100 a year - so less than Â£2 a week.  Sorry.  For me no big deal. And that is the truth of all these 'individuals being better or worse off' figures and 'debate'.  On a day-to-day basis the amounts they are talking about are almost totally insignificant to the vast majority and are simply 'lost in the noise' of our daily expenditure.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 28, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It's spin, Hogan. We are Â£1400 better off in the union is the positive way of saying we'll be Â£1400 worse off if we leave.
		
Click to expand...

Pity - I was rather thinking of telling my mum to vote NO so she would get a windfall of Â£1400.


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Pity - I was rather thinking of telling my mum to vote NO so she would get a windfall of Â£1400.
		
Click to expand...

And then next year we can vote YES and get the payoff from the nats!

:whoo:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 28, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			And then next year we can vote YES and get the payoff from the nats!

:whoo:
		
Click to expand...

I think it sad when I look North and see so much being made of 'better and worse off' numbers when we are not talking about life post a budget or indeed post a GenElect when such considerations are absolutely valid.  Yes - consider the future prosperity of the country as a whole - but not this individual money stuff when we are talking about the future of a country; it's relationship with it's nearest neighbour; and it's place in the world.

Anyway...


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I think it sad when I look North and see so much being made of 'better and worse off' numbers when we are not talking about life post a budget or indeed post a GenElect when such considerations are absolutely valid.  Yes - consider the future prosperity of the country as a whole - but not this individual money stuff when we are talking about the future of a country; it's relationship with it's nearest neighbour; and it's place in the world.

Anyway...
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree, all this is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things


----------



## IanG (May 28, 2014)

Surely the independence decision is so momentous and long term that details about whether we're Â£1000 better or worse off, or whether UKIP will form the next Westminster government are not the real basis on which we who have a vote should be deciding. 

This is good news really because (in my opinion) we will not have reliable information on any such detailed questions come polling day.

The way I see it is that we need to ask ourselves simply "do we WANT to be independent" or "do we WANT to be part of the UK"?  And by "want" I'm afraid I mean in our guts & hearts.  For such a long term decision, known unknowns such whether England will vote the UK out of Europe are small beer in comparison to what country we want to live in. 

Take an example, imagine someone persuaded you that it would be economically better to become the 52nd state of the USA. Despite all the geo-political clout that would  bring, would you sign up? I suspect most of us would answer rather fast with a 'thanks but, no-thanks', because we don't 'want' to be part of the US. We don't need, nor should we use, microscopic analysis to know the answer. 

So when all the froth has died away and we find ourselves alone in the polling booth in September, I suspect most of us  will find it pretty easy to know which way we want to vote. And if we all answer that question honestly we'll get the correct outcome for both Scotland and the rUK - whatever that is.    Finding out the answer is the purpose of the poll after all.


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 28, 2014)

Ian for First Minister!

:thup:


----------



## IanG (May 28, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Ian for First Minister!

:thup:
		
Click to expand...


Only if Eck leaves me some pies...


----------



## Slab (May 28, 2014)

More importantly will an independent Scotland get its own internet country code, maybe .sco ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 28, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Every report from the yes campaign is positive to an independent Scotland, do you not question that Doon?
		
Click to expand...

Of course.
It all comes down to which of the two liars do you believe most!


----------



## Val (May 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			There is always spare cash around, look how much of it the UK government spent on the Somerset levels this winter.
Non story as it was always going to happen if Scotland won independence.
		
Click to expand...

Pardon the geography lesson but what has Somerset got to do with Scotland?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 28, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Pardon the geography lesson but what has Somerset got to do with Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

The money needed to establish an independent Scotland will initially come from both sides of the border.


----------



## CMAC (May 28, 2014)

IanG said:



			Surely the independence decision is so momentous and long term that details about whether we're Â£1000 better or worse off, or whether UKIP will form the next Westminster government are not the real basis on which we who have a vote should be deciding. 

This is good news really because (in my opinion) we will not have reliable information on any such detailed questions come polling day.

The way I see it is that we need to ask ourselves simply "do we WANT to be independent" or "do we WANT to be part of the UK"?  And by "want" I'm afraid I mean in our guts & hearts.  For such a long term decision, known unknowns such whether England will vote the UK out of Europe are small beer in comparison to what country we want to live in. 

Take an example, imagine someone persuaded you that it would be economically better to become the 52nd state of the USA. Despite all the geo-political clout that would  bring, would you sign up? I suspect most of us would answer rather fast with a 'thanks but, no-thanks', because we don't 'want' to be part of the US. We don't need, nor should we use, microscopic analysis to know the answer. 

So when all the froth has died away and we find ourselves alone in the polling booth in September, I suspect most of us  will find it pretty easy to know which way we want to vote. And if we all answer that question honestly we'll get the correct outcome for both Scotland and the rUK - whatever that is.    Finding out the answer is the purpose of the poll after all. 

Click to expand...

nicely put:thup:




can I just add you would have to be Dence to vote independence!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 28, 2014)

CMAC said:



			nicely put:thup:




can I just add you would have to be Dence to vote independence!
		
Click to expand...

Well you have just called half a nation ignorant..........brave.


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well you have just called half a nation ignorant..........brave.
		
Click to expand...

LESS than half!


----------



## Val (May 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The money needed to establish an independent Scotland will initially come from both sides of the border.
		
Click to expand...

Initially? Does that mean Scotland will instantly become in debt to the remainder of the UK?

Where are you finding this information?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 28, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Initially? Does that mean Scotland will instantly become in debt to the remainder of the UK?

Where are you finding this information?
		
Click to expand...

It is in the Edinburgh Agreement.


----------



## Val (May 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			It is in the Edinburgh Agreement.
		
Click to expand...

No it's not, if so point me to a paragraph and section I've missed.

The Edinburgh is an agreement for the referendum not an agreement post yes


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 29, 2014)

Valentino said:



			No it's not, if so point me to a paragraph and section I've missed.

The Edinburgh is an agreement for the referendum not an agreement post yes
		
Click to expand...

I think it also includes the period post Yes and the actual independence day.


----------



## Val (May 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think it also includes the period post Yes and the actual independence day.
		
Click to expand...

You think? Have you checked or are you happy posting inaccuracies without checking?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 29, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You think? Have you checked or are you happy posting inaccuracies without checking?
		
Click to expand...

That was my get out clause!
I am pretty certain I heard this debated after the Edinburgh Agreement was signed.
Perhaps you can prove me wrong?


----------



## Val (May 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That was my get out clause!
I am pretty certain I heard this debated after the Edinburgh Agreement was signed.
Perhaps you can prove me wrong?
		
Click to expand...

I can, read the agreement.


----------



## Hobbit (May 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The money needed to establish an independent Scotland will initially come from both sides of the border.
		
Click to expand...

Are you sure?



Doon frae Troon said:



			It is in the Edinburgh Agreement.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe its in a different version than the one I read...



Valentino said:



			You think? Have you checked or are you happy posting inaccuracies without checking?
		
Click to expand...

C'mon Doon, give us the chapter and verse... or paragraph... that we've missed.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 29, 2014)

Section 30 
Co-operation.


----------



## Val (May 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Section 30 
Co-operation.
		
Click to expand...

Which makes no reference at all about money.


----------



## Hobbit (May 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Section 30 
Co-operation.
		
Click to expand...

To quote, "Co-operation 30. The United Kingdom and Scottish Governments are committed, through the Memorandum of Understanding between them and others, to
working together on matters of mutual interest and to the principles of good communication and mutual respect. The two governments have reached this agreement in that spirit. They look forward to a referendum that is legal and
fair producing a decisive and respected outcome. The two governments are committed to continue to work together constructively in the light of the outcome, whatever it is, in the best interests of the people of Scotland and of
the rest of the United Kingdom."

So this section says that boths sides will finance the establishment of an independant Scotland... just where in the quoted section does it say that Doon?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 30, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			To quote, "Co-operation 30. The United Kingdom and Scottish Governments are committed, through the Memorandum of Understanding between them and others, to working together on matters of mutual interest and to the principles of good communication and mutual respect. The two governments have reached this agreement in that spirit. 

That bit.

Defense, finance, diplomatic ties, transport, customs/border security, crime.....just for starters
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Hobbit (May 30, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			To quote, "Co-operation 30. The United Kingdom and Scottish Governments are committed, through the Memorandum of Understanding between them and others, to
working together on matters of mutual interest and to the principles of good communication and mutual respect. The two governments have reached this agreement in that spirit. They look forward to a referendum that is legal and
fair producing a decisive and respected outcome. The two governments are committed to continue to work together constructively in the light of the outcome, whatever it is, in the best interests of the people of Scotland and of
the rest of the United Kingdom."

So this section says that boths sides will finance the establishment of an independant Scotland... just where in the quoted section does it say that Doon?
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:





Hobbit said:



			To quote, "Co-operation 30. The United Kingdom and Scottish Governments are committed, through the Memorandum of Understanding between them and others, to working together on matters of mutual interest and to the principles of good communication and mutual respect. The two governments have reached this agreement in that spirit. 

That bit.

Defense, finance, diplomatic ties, transport, customs/border security, crime.....just for starters
		
Click to expand...

No doubt it will cost all parties but I don't see rUK paying to set up establishments in Scotland, only financing the rejigging of establishments in rUK. But hey, if you want to interpret it differently, and see something that blantantly isn't there, knock yourself out.

You may even be right at the end of the day but nowhere in that document, or that clause, does it say rUK will finance the establishment of an independent Scotland. There's enough wriggle room in that clause for someone to say, "yes we support your right to do so, and recognise the outcome of the vote. Good luck and good bye."
		
Click to expand...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 30, 2014)

Hobbit said:





Doon frae Troon said:



			No doubt it will cost all parties but I don't see rUK paying to set up establishments in Scotland, only financing the rejigging of establishments in rUK. But hey, if you want to interpret it differently, and see something that blantantly isn't there, knock yourself out.

You may even be right at the end of the day but nowhere in that document, or that clause, does it say rUK will finance the establishment of an independent Scotland. There's enough wriggle room in that clause for someone to say, "yes we support your right to do so, and recognise the outcome of the vote. Good luck and good bye."
		
Click to expand...

Surely it will be necessary for a rUK government to part fund the disentanglement of iScot from the existing UK systems to ensure that the remaining rUK systems are as required.  And in doing that the rUK will be part funding set up of those for iScot - especiallyu where systems of the two countries interface.  Cooperation would be not just pragmatic but essential.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 30, 2014)

The debate has kind of moved on after this weeks 'goons show'
Darling being ripped apart for quoting the set up costs by the professor who wrote the report he was quoting from.
Soapy being ripped apart by his own parliament by not quoting costing figures he had promised 2 years ago.

tweedle dee and tweedle dum.

I am more interested in Scotland being able to deliver a more equal society than exists at present in the UK.
The rich are becoming much richer and for the first time since 1945 we see food banks in every UK town.

If the UK is best option for Scotland how come there were 3 Dollars to the Pound in 1968 and only 1.5 in 2014.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 30, 2014)

PS 
Post 2314 are not my words.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (May 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			PS 
Post 2314 are not my words.
		
Click to expand...

I know


----------



## Hobbit (May 30, 2014)

Hobbit said:





Doon frae Troon said:



			No doubt it will cost all parties but I don't see rUK paying to set up establishments in Scotland, only financing the rejigging of establishments in rUK. But hey, if you want to interpret it differently, and see something that blantantly isn't there, knock yourself out.

You may even be right at the end of the day but nowhere in that document, or that clause, does it say rUK will finance the establishment of an independent Scotland. There's enough wriggle room in that clause for someone to say, "yes we support your right to do so, and recognise the outcome of the vote. Good luck and good bye."
		
Click to expand...




SwingsitlikeHogan said:





Hobbit said:



			Surely it will be necessary for a rUK government to part fund the disentanglement of iScot from the existing UK systems to ensure that the remaining rUK systems are as required.  And in doing that the rUK will be part funding set up of those for iScot - especiallyu where systems of the two countries interface.  Cooperation would be not just pragmatic but essential.
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Co-operation will be essential but my take on it is rUK will pay its side of the wall, and iScotland their side of the wall. There may be a purchase of services from either side, e.g. we'll do your 'x' if you'll pay 'y,' until either side has developed its own services.

But rUK paying to set up something in Scotland that rUK doesn't need... if you believe that, you're deluded.

EDIT: something very weird going on with the quoting tool today.
		
Click to expand...



Click to expand...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 30, 2014)

Hobbit said:





Hobbit said:





SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Totally agree. Co-operation will be essential but my take on it is rUK will pay its side of the wall, and iScotland their side of the wall. There may be a purchase of services from either side, e.g. we'll do your 'x' if you'll pay 'y,' until either side has developed its own services.

But rUK paying to set up something in Scotland that rUK doesn't need... if you believe that, you're deluded.
		
Click to expand...



Click to expand...



Click to expand...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 30, 2014)

Re x and y.
Translate that into Trident for starters and you will see that it is not so simple.


----------



## Hobbit (May 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Re x and y.
Translate that into Trident for starters and you will see that it is not so simple.
		
Click to expand...

And we'll protect your borders if you allow us to use Faslane. I'm not disagreeing with you that there will be some quid pro quo, I'm saying that the rUK are hardly likely to fund the building of what you haven't got.

Imagine the success a Con party would have at the next election if they turned round to rUK before Sept and said, "rUK taxes will fund the development of Scotland post independence." Its almost the political suicide the Cons would commit if they said lets totally privatise the National Health.

And if Scotland is so much more wealthy than rUK, as is being suggested, maybe it will be Scotland paying rUK for going its own way...


----------



## Foxholer (May 30, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			something very weird going on with the quoting tool today.
		
Click to expand...

Nope!

It only takes 1 misplaced edit (1 too many characters deleted for example) and it won't 'pair up' the delimiters.

If you then quote that post, it carries it through.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 30, 2014)

I never said that rUK will fund iScotland.
I commented that there will be negotiation on both sides and the expense will not all be iScotlands.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I never said that rUK will fund iScotland.
I commented that there will be negotiation on both sides and the expense will not all be iScotlands.
		
Click to expand...

You said that both sides would fund the setting up of an Independent Scotland


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You said that both sides would fund the setting up of an Independent Scotland
		
Click to expand...

..and?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			..and?
		
Click to expand...

And as yet haven't been able to show where it says that's 

You want to leave - fund it yourself , certainly don't want to see my taxes funding anything with and Independent Scotland


----------



## Hobbit (May 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And as yet haven't been able to show where it says that's 

You want to leave - fund it yourself , certainly don't want to see my taxes funding anything with and Independent Scotland
		
Click to expand...

Don't worry yourself Phil, its as clear as a blue sky in Section 30 of the Edinburgh Agreement . And of course rUK will have cash to burn...:rofl:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 30, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Don't worry yourself Phil, its as clear as a blue sky in Section 30 of the Edinburgh Agreement . And of course rUK will have cash to burn...:rofl:
		
Click to expand...

Is the Edinburgh Agreement the same as that Fantasy Novel that I have read ( the white paper ) 

Has anyone actually "agreed" this agreement ?


----------



## Hobbit (May 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Is the Edinburgh Agreement the same as that Fantasy Novel that I have read ( the white paper ) 

Has anyone actually "agreed" this agreement ?
		
Click to expand...

To be fair, its a decent document. Unfortunately there's a number of politicians that have put their own spin on the interpretations, and some people have swallowed the groundbait before its even hit the water.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 30, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			To be fair, its a decent document. Unfortunately there's a number of politicians that have put their own spin on the interpretations, and some people have swallowed the groundbait before its even hit the water.
		
Click to expand...

Seemed like to me it was full of assumptions of what they believe should happen


----------



## Hobbit (May 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Seemed like to me it was full of assumptions of what they believe should happen
		
Click to expand...

I'd call it an Entente Cordial. A let's be really cuddly and nice about it... but when it comes to dipping into the public purse I don't think anything will be given away for nothing.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 30, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			I'd call it an Entente Cordial. A let's be really cuddly and nice about it... but when it comes to dipping into the public purse I don't think anything will be given away for nothing.
		
Click to expand...


And we are certainly not going to "give away" equipment etc


----------



## Foxholer (May 30, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



*You want to leave - fund it yourself *, certainly don't want to see my taxes funding anything with and Independent Scotland
		
Click to expand...

You've obviously never been through a divorce - which is pretty much what this is/would be!

As others have stated. it seems logical that iScotland would fund the new infrastructure, but there would certainly be costs involved for rUK in unwinding the old infrastructure and re-attaching to the new one.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And we are certainly not going to "give away" equipment etc
		
Click to expand...

But would it be your equipment to 'give away'.

How do you work out 12% of the DVLA or Scotlands share of the National Savings Bank [premium Bonds] ?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 31, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			But would it be your equipment to 'give away'.

How do you work out 12% of the DVLA or Scotlands share of the National Savings Bank [premium Bonds] ?
		
Click to expand...

Its UK's equipment - you decide to leave UK you leave everything behind.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Its UK's equipment - you decide to leave UK you leave everything behind.
		
Click to expand...

including debt?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			including debt?
		
Click to expand...

Fine by me


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Fine by me
		
Click to expand...


You might find yourself alone on that one...UK debt by 2106 is predicted to be Â£1.6 Trillion.Remove 10% of the population/GDP etc etc but keep the same level of debt ( or increase it per capita) and rUK will be goosed.You seriously don't want that scenario to happen.Rating agencies will pounce, the cost of borrowing will increase for your govt.

Talk about cutting off your nose


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			You might find yourself alone on that one...UK debt by 2106 is predicted to be Â£1.6 Trillion.Remove 10% of the population/GDP etc etc but keep the same level of debt ( or increase it per capita) and rUK will be goosed.You seriously don't want that scenario to happen.Rating agencies will pounce, the cost of borrowing will increase for your govt.

*Talk about cutting off your nose*

Click to expand...

Very valid statement towards a lot in regards independence.

The good thing is we wont have to spend a penny on anything in Scotland so that will save us a bit of money. Wonder how much on benefits we wont pay - expect there will be a great deal of UK assets in Scotland that could be sold off as well. But its all speculation because again dont expect it to actually happen.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Very valid statement towards a lot in regards independence.

The good thing is we wont have to spend a penny on anything in Scotland so that will save us a bit of money. Wonder how much on benefits we wont pay - expect there will be a great deal of UK assets in Scotland that could be sold off as well. But its all speculation because again dont expect it to actually happen.
		
Click to expand...


you actually have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			you actually have no idea what you're talking about.
		
Click to expand...

Again another valid statement in regards Independence for Scotland


----------



## Adi2Dassler (May 31, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Again another valid statement in regards Independence for Scotland
		
Click to expand...

My statement was nothing about Scotland and everything about you, you don't have a clue what you're talking about.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			My statement was nothing about Scotland and everything about you, you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
		
Click to expand...

Where as i will prefer to stick to the subject instead of about the posters :thup:

Independence vote will not give a yes vote - thankfully enough people realise leaving is not a good thing in the long run - just my opinion ( backed up by the polls i understand ) of course.


----------



## c1973 (May 31, 2014)

I know polls may not be a completely accurate way to judge public opinion, but it's good to see a half decent lead for (imo) common sense.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/16630456

Edit: imo.


----------



## FairwayDodger (May 31, 2014)

c1973 said:



			I know polls may not be a completely accurate way to judge public opinion, but it's good to see a half decent lead for common sense.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/16630456

Click to expand...

Followers of the thread will no I'm a declared NO voter but I think it very wrong to characterise that opinion as "common sense". There is no right or wrong answer for the referendum. Scotland has done well as part of the union and would continue to do so but could equally flourish as an independent country, I'm sure. Whatever happens we all need to get along afterwards and make the most of the result, however we vote personally.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 31, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Followers of the thread will no I'm a declared NO voter but I think it very wrong to characterise that opinion as "common sense". There is no right or wrong answer for the referendum. Scotland has done well as part of the union and would continue to do so but could equally flourish as an independent country, I'm sure. *Whatever happens we all need to get along afterwards* and make the most of the result, however we vote personally.
		
Click to expand...

Think that could be a big issue on both sides regardless of the results. Think some relationships could be damaged.


----------



## c1973 (May 31, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Followers of the thread will no I'm a declared NO voter but I think it very wrong to characterise that opinion as "common sense". There is no right or wrong answer for the referendum. Scotland has done well as part of the union and would continue to do so but could equally flourish as an independent country, I'm sure. Whatever happens we all need to get along afterwards and make the most of the result, however we vote personally.
		
Click to expand...

Quite correct, I should have added that it was in my opinion.

It will be interesting to see what happens after the vote in terms of it being accepted. I don't think we will see people rioting in the streets, but I think there may be quite a bit of Ill feeling created.


----------



## Hobbit (May 31, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Followers of the thread will no I'm a declared NO voter but I think it very wrong to characterise that opinion as "common sense". There is no right or wrong answer for the referendum. Scotland has done well as part of the union and would continue to do so but could equally flourish as an independent country, I'm sure. Whatever happens we all need to get along afterwards and make the most of the result, however we vote personally.
		
Click to expand...

Whichever way the vote goes, I hope it is decisive. Imagine the bickering, finger pointing and bile that will pour out if it ends up as 49% 'v' 51%, either way.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 31, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Whichever way the vote goes, I hope it is decisive. *Imagine the bickering, finger pointing and bile that will pour out* if it ends up as 49% 'v' 51%, either way.
		
Click to expand...

That has happened before the vote - can only see it increasing afterwards regardless of the result - some of the seeds of resentment have been sown already


----------



## Doon frae Troon (May 31, 2014)

Phil ......a Radio Scotland show tried to stir that one up and for over an hour on the phone ins there was absolutely no one complaining. It was in fact the exact opposite with folk ringing in to say that on the streets, the process has been very polite and respectful.
But hey...in the world of Phil that is not a story!

The fact that you seem happy to mop up Scotland's share of the UK's debt shows how little you know about the process.
rUK would be completely ruined if that was the case.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (May 31, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Phil ......a Radio Scotland show tried to stir that one up and for over an hour on the phone ins there was absolutely no one complaining. It was in fact the exact opposite with folk ringing in to say that on the streets, the process has been very polite and respectful.
But hey...in the world of Phil that is not a story!

The fact that you seem happy to mop up Scotland's share of the UK's debt shows how little you know about the process.
rUK would be completely ruined if that was the case.
		
Click to expand...

Tried to stir up what ?

Are you really going to suggest a phone in paints the whole picture ? 

read this thread for a bit of counter balance and you can see an undercurrent bubbling away.

The debt will not be an issue because i believe as been discussed that a yes vote will not happen. 

I thought i would join in with the statements without any backing - seems mandatory on here and with this subject.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 2, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Whichever way the vote goes, I hope it is decisive. Imagine the bickering, finger pointing and bile that will pour out if it ends up as 49% 'v' 51%, either way.
		
Click to expand...

Who knows how English, Polish etc residents of Scotland will vote - however there will be interesting days if it turns out like that and the 2% margin is as a result of the votes of English voters (yes I know it doesn't actually work like that)


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Who knows how English, Polish etc residents of Scotland will vote - however there will be interesting days if it turns out like that and the 2% margin is as a result of the votes of English voters (yes I know it doesn't actually work like that)
		
Click to expand...

Virtually all of my circle of English born family, neighbours and friends who live in Scotland are voting for independence.

They still have close ties to their families and friends in England and hear all the horror stories of hospital/doctor waiting lists, mortgage/rent costs, school choices/education, traffic/polution, crime etc etc.

They say we would be mad not to.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They say we would be mad not to.
		
Click to expand...

As this will not happen and does not happen north of the wall. Your either blinkered or just telling a few porkies.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 2, 2014)

No disrespect to our English neighbours, or Poles, Latvians etc. but I personally think it's scandalous that they have a vote at all. Just because they are resident in Scotland at the moment should never have entitled them to a say. After all they can scraper back across the border/s if they don't like the aftermath of the vote. 

I wonder if they would be as keen on voting for independence if it meant rescinding their right to nationality of the country of their birth and accepting Scottish nationality without question, regardless of the outcome of the vote. I mean, if they care so much about Scotland it wouldn't be a problem would it?

This vote should have been for resident Scots only, no one else! 

And yes, I know this has all been argued over and agreed but it does not make it right in my book.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 2, 2014)

c1973 said:



			This vote should have been for resident Scots only, no one else! 

And yes, I know this has all been argued over and agreed but it does not make it right in my book.
		
Click to expand...

So you would not allow my 89 year old Welsh mother who has resided in Scotland for 67 years a vote.
Despite the fact she must have lived many more years in Scotland than you have.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So you would not allow my 89 year old Welsh mother who has resided in Scotland for 67 years a vote.
Despite the fact she must have lived many more years in Scotland than you have.
		
Click to expand...

Nope, sorry. Cut off point should have been 'born and currently residing in', imo.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 2, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			As this will not happen and does not happen north of the wall. Your either blinkered or just telling a few porkies.
		
Click to expand...

A three week wait for a doctors appointment......not in Scotland. I get same/next day appointments.
Mortgages/Rents more expensive in Scotland........on average definitely not
State school choices/education/class sizes...............much better in Scotland 
Traffic/ pollution......................... miles better in Scotland
Crime.....................................lower in Scotland

Not blinkered or telling porkies.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 2, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Nope, sorry. Cut off point should have been 'born and currently residing in', imo.
		
Click to expand...

67 years living in a country without being granted vote. I think we have moved on a bit since 1850.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			A three week wait for a doctors appointment......not in Scotland. I get same/next day appointments.
Mortgages/Rents more expensive in Scotland........on average definitely not
State school choices/education/class sizes...............much better in Scotland 
Traffic/ pollution......................... miles better in Scotland
Crime.....................................lower in Scotland

Not blinkered or telling porkies.
		
Click to expand...

I get same day, next day appointments with my docs
morgages set by banks, rent set by market forces. Never heard of it being set by country before
Schools much better in Scotland, maybe, but I would prefer a bit of proof on that.
Traffic and pollution less in Scotland - might be because there are less vehicles perhaps
Crime lower in Scotland - is this done by proportion of people living in the country or a figure just plucked out of thin air.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So you would not allow my 89 year old Welsh mother who has resided in Scotland for 67 years a vote.
Despite the fact she must have lived many more years in Scotland than you have.
		
Click to expand...

Your starting to sound less Scottish than me.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 2, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-26481574

There you go Old Skier.

Mind you we are still top of the UK murrrrrrrrrder lists.
I blame Taggart.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			67 years living in a country without being granted vote. *I think we have moved on a bit since 1850*.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed we have. Zero relevance to my point though.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 2, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Indeed we have. Zero relevance to my point though.
		
Click to expand...

Suffragettes/votes for women!


----------



## c1973 (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Suffragettes/votes for women!
		
Click to expand...

Definitely zero relevance to my point then. Thanks for the confirmation.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 2, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Definitely zero relevance to my point then. Thanks for the confirmation. 

Click to expand...

You want relevance. This is Yes v RUK, relevance was never part of the deal or else we would all have a vote as it will have implications on the lot of us especially if wee eck wants us to pay for his little plan.


----------



## CMAC (Jun 2, 2014)

so Scotland can keep and use all its own income tax if we vote No by the Tories I heard on news tonight- good idea.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 2, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Definitely zero relevance to my point then. Thanks for the confirmation. 

Click to expand...

But your point was total rubbish, slightly scary and would never have been considered by anyone at anytime !!


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			so Scotland can keep and use all its own income tax if we vote No by the Tories I heard on news tonight- good idea.
		
Click to expand...

Might win votes but it might upset a few south of the wall. I'm going to have to pay towards HS2 and won't get any benefit so why should the Scots be immune. Income tax goes towards a lot of things so not anything that appeals to me. If we are going down the devo max route by stealth then let Scotland have it's independence even though I am against it.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			But your point was total rubbish, slightly scary and would never have been considered by anyone at anytime !!
		
Click to expand...

Yep, very good point and well made. :mmm:


Whereas yours tend to burl away on a wee tangent with little reference to whatever it is your answering, at best. Or, quite often, they are just nonsense that has been made up with little (if any) basis in fact. :thup:

Must be something in the Werthers.............


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			so Scotland can keep and use all its own income tax if we vote No by the Tories I heard on news tonight- good idea.
		
Click to expand...

But the big question is do you trust the Tories to keep their word when it comes to Scotland.

The mainstream parties seem to be tripping over themselves to offer bigger and better Devo Max options now.
I wonder why that is as they seemed so confident of a NO win?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 2, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Yep, very good point and well made. :mmm:


Whereas yours tend to burl away on a wee tangent with little reference to whatever it is your answering, at best. Or, quite often, they are just nonsense that has been made up with little (if any) basis in fact. :thup:

Must be something in the Werthers.............

Click to expand...

My neighbour has a great car sticker which says.
I would rather be an old fart than a young 'Richard' Head.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			But your point was total rubbish, slightly scary and would never have been considered by anyone at anytime !!
		
Click to expand...

So nothing new in the Scotland Independance debate then


----------



## c1973 (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			My neighbour has a great car sticker which says.
I would rather be an old fart than a young 'Richard' Head.
		
Click to expand...

Mine has one that says 'oxygen thieves shouldn't be on the road'


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			But the big question is do you trust the Tories to keep their word when it comes to Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

Do you wear a tin foil hat


----------



## CMAC (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			But the big question is do you trust the Tories to keep their word when it comes to Scotland.

The mainstream parties seem to be tripping over themselves to offer bigger and better Devo Max options now.
*I wonder why that is as they seemed so confident of a NO win*?
		
Click to expand...

erm to get more votes for *their *party


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			erm to get more votes for *their *party 

Click to expand...

They must feel they need them then


----------



## Hobbit (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			A three week wait for a doctors appointment......not in Scotland. I get same/next day appointments.
Mortgages/Rents more expensive in Scotland........on average definitely not
State school choices/education/class sizes...............much better in Scotland 
Traffic/ pollution......................... miles better in Scotland
Crime.....................................lower in Scotland

Not blinkered or telling porkies.
		
Click to expand...

Have the Scots invaded England again?

I get same day/next day GP appointments - I can't possibly be living in England.
Last year I bought a 3 bed detached house in a nice area of town, in sight of the Nth Yorks National Park and the North Sea. Did I say it was so cheap I didn't pay stamp duty? Maybe Nth Yorks is part of Scotland?
Education, & school choices. No problem around here! You've almost got me convinced I'm in Scotland...
Traffic, what traffic? Miles I do loads off, predominantly in northern England. A regular run is 135 miles to sunny Grimsby, and the same back... usually about 2hrs each way. Must be part of Scotland.
Crime, well I could take you to some really rough areas of the northeast. But they're safer than areas of Scotland. And I could take you to areas of the northeast that are as safe as the Highlands & Islands.

You don't half peddle some rubbish Doon. Have you found that bit in Section 30 yet that does mention finance?


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			A three week wait for a doctors appointment......not in Scotland. I get same/next day appointments.
Mortgages/Rents more expensive in Scotland........on average definitely not
State school choices/education/class sizes...............much better in Scotland 
Traffic/ pollution......................... miles better in Scotland
Crime.....................................lower in Scotland

Not blinkered or telling porkies.
		
Click to expand...

So the fact that you live in a backwater hamlet is a fair comparison to life in Tower Hamlets!   Take a look at these issues in larger connabations in Scotland and you will get a different picture.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 3, 2014)

Douglas Alexander v Daphnie on BBC 1 [Scotland] tonight 22.40.
Should be entertaining.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 3, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			So the fact that you live in a backwater hamlet is a fair comparison to life in Tower Hamlets!   Take a look at these issues in larger connabations in Scotland and you will get a different picture.
		
Click to expand...

Which of the five things I listed would be different in say Aberdeen, Falkirk, Livingstone or Dumfries then?
Bear in mind Crime is a percentage figure.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Douglas Alexander v Daphnie on BBC 1 [Scotland] tonight 22.40.
Should be entertaining.
		
Click to expand...

Not really as everything DA says will be lies, more lies and even more lies whilst dear old Daphnie (whoever she is) will (if she's a Yes supporter) be the only one telling the truth.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 3, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Have the Scots invaded England again?

I get same day/next day GP appointments - I can't possibly be living in England.
Last year I bought a 3 bed detached house in a nice area of town, in sight of the Nth Yorks National Park and the North Sea. Did I say it was so cheap I didn't pay stamp duty? Maybe Nth Yorks is part of Scotland?
Education, & school choices. No problem around here! You've almost got me convinced I'm in Scotland...
Traffic, what traffic? Miles I do loads off, predominantly in northern England. A regular run is 135 miles to sunny Grimsby, and the same back... usually about 2hrs each way. Must be part of Scotland.
Crime, well I could take you to some really rough areas of the northeast. But they're safer than areas of Scotland. And I could take you to areas of the northeast that are as safe as the Highlands & Islands.

You don't half peddle some rubbish Doon. Have you found that bit in Section 30 yet that does mention finance?
		
Click to expand...

My comments I quoted were all from friends and relatives who live in North Yorks, Norfolk, Wilts, Kent, Essex, IOW and South Wales. So not really my rubbish.

I travel in North England a bit and whilst it is not nearly as scarey as the Deep South it is still much busier than Scotland.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 3, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Not really as everything DA says will be lies, more lies and even more lies whilst dear old Daphnie (whoever she is) will (if she's a Yes supporter) be the only one telling the truth.
		
Click to expand...

Nicola will be pleased!
Surprised a Scot does not know who Daphnie is.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Nicola will be pleased!
Surprised a Scot does not know who Daphnie is.
		
Click to expand...

I'm British/Welsh


----------



## c1973 (Jun 4, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27690028

Another independent report indicating Salmonds vision of a land of milk and honey might prove to be a tad more costly to the nation than first thought.

No doubt it will be shot down and dismissed with cries of 'nonsense',' simply not true',' we don't believe that to be the case' and other _positive_ sound bites from Salmond and his cronies.


----------



## ger147 (Jun 4, 2014)

c1973 said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27690028

Another independent report indicating Salmonds vision of a land of milk and honey might prove to be a tad more costly to the nation than first thought.

No doubt it will be shot down and dismissed with cries of 'nonsense',' simply not true',' we don't believe that to be the case' and other _positive_ sound bites from Salmond and his cronies.
		
Click to expand...

I have no real interest in any points scoring exercise as this thread has largely become, but any report based on OBR data can no more claim to be "independent" that anything that the SNP produce on the Yes side.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 4, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I have no real interest in any points scoring exercise as this thread has largely become, but any report based on OBR data can no more claim to be "independent" that anything that the SNP produce on the Yes side.
		
Click to expand...

I thought the OBR was independent by its very nature. In fact, the whole point of setting it up was for it to be politically neutral?


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I thought the OBR was independent by its very nature. In fact, the whole point of setting it up was for it to be politically neutral?
		
Click to expand...

You are dealing with the Tin Foil Hat brigade though.


----------



## ger147 (Jun 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I thought the OBR was independent by its very nature. In fact, the whole point of setting it up was for it to be politically neutral?
		
Click to expand...

Of course it is - 2 of the 5 board members are ex HM Treasury and a 3rd has conducted policy reviews for the government. Not political at all.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 4, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Of course it is - 2 of the 5 board members are ex HM Treasury and a 3rd has conducted policy reviews for the government. Not political at all.
		
Click to expand...

Ex treasury? So they know what they're doing in theory then. Civil servants are politically neutral surely?


----------



## ger147 (Jun 4, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Ex treasury? So they know what they're doing in theory then. Civil servants are politically neutral surely?
		
Click to expand...

The idea behind the OBR was to get someone else to do forecasts as the Treasury were not neutral, and then they staff it from the Treasury? Aye, nae bother...


----------



## c1973 (Jun 4, 2014)

ger147 said:



			The idea behind the OBR was to get someone else to do forecasts as the Treasury were not neutral, and then they staff it from the Treasury? Aye, nae bother...
		
Click to expand...

Might as well just close the thread then. No point in debating owt really.


----------



## ger147 (Jun 4, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Might as well just close the thread then. No point in debating owt really.
		
Click to expand...

It would actually be a really interesting debate re. Scotland becoming independent or not, the pros and cons etc. but unfortunately there are no facts to be had from either side, so those of us like me with a vote have nothing to base a decision on but gut feel, intuition or simply the idea of being in the UK vs being Independent.

Just for once it would have been nice to be able to make an informed decision based on all the facts but as I don't in fact wear a tin foil hat I didn't expect that to be the case so I've not been let down by either side.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 4, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Might win votes but it might upset a few south of the wall. I'm going to have to pay towards HS2 and won't get any benefit so why should the Scots be immune. Income tax goes towards a lot of things so not anything that appeals to me. If we are going down the devo max route by stealth then let Scotland have it's independence even though I am against it.
		
Click to expand...

Seems like Scots are being offered more and more towards Devo Max by BT (inc Scottish Tories) even though Cameron rejected it as a referendum option.  So does this mean that Cameron has changed his mind about devo max or that BT are offering something that they can't deliver.


----------



## Val (Jun 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			My comments I quoted were all from friends and relatives who live in North Yorks, Norfolk, Wilts, Kent, Essex, IOW and South Wales. So not really my rubbish.

*I travel in North England a bit and whilst it is not nearly as scarey as the Deep South it is still much busier than Scotland*.
		
Click to expand...

Never been on the M8 at Glasgow city centre or at the Gyle in Edniburgh or through Bailieston interchange or Eurocentral? What aboth the M80 at Cumbernauld. Equally as busy as the M60/M56/M62.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Never been on the M8 at Glasgow city centre or at the Gyle in Edniburgh or through Bailieston interchange or Eurocentral? What aboth the M80 at Cumbernauld. Equally as busy as the M60/M56/M62.
		
Click to expand...

Don't quite know how debate on traffic came about but from my experience of late - putting rush hours apart - driving in Scotland in the Central Belt is a delight compared with driving in England midlands down.  And down here in sunny Surrey, Hants, Berkshire traffic is a nightmare.  In fact it is one of the reasons that we are thinking of moving to the north.  In fact my wife finds driving in Scotland so pleasant and stress free that she'd even consider moving to Scotland.  And back to the referendum debate - she'd be even more inclined to move to a social democratic YES Scotland as she is so depressed by the thought of living in a right of centre UKIP influenced England.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 4, 2014)

c1973 said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27690028

Another independent report indicating Salmonds vision of a land of milk and honey might prove to be a tad more costly to the nation than first thought.

No doubt it will be shot down and dismissed with cries of 'nonsense',' simply not true',' we don't believe that to be the case' and other _positive_ sound bites from Salmond and his cronies.
		
Click to expand...

I think that they probably have that correct, it is basically the same warning issued to the UK.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think that they probably have that correct, it is basically the same warning issued to the UK.
		
Click to expand...

What warning issued to the UK ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Never been on the M8 at Glasgow city centre or at the Gyle in Edniburgh or through Bailieston interchange or Eurocentral? What aboth the M80 at Cumbernauld. Equally as busy as the M60/M56/M62.
		
Click to expand...

Never really used M60/M65/M62 so could not say..... anyway that's nearly the Midlands!!
I find the M6, A66 and A1M/M1 busier than the Scottish central belt where I can usually get to Muirfield from Turnberry in about 2.5 hours......unless the Open is on!.
Sailed up the M80 a couple of weeks ago when it took me just 4.5 hours to get from Cumbernauld to Dornoch at peak hours.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 6, 2014)

Looks like Barack wants to keep the USA's missiles in Scotland and have Scottish soldiers back up their foreign policies.

Poor response from Mr Obama.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Looks like Barack wants to keep the USA's missiles in Scotland and have Scottish soldiers back up their foreign policies.

Poor response from Mr Obama.
		
Click to expand...

Don't you mean UK soldiers ? Because he stated he wants Scotland to stay in UK - stronger together and a strong allie for US

Salmond response was his usual


----------



## Val (Jun 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Never really used M60/M65/M62 so could not say..... anyway that's nearly the Midlands!!
I find the M6, A66 and A1M/M1 busier than the Scottish central belt where I can usually get to Muirfield from Turnberry in about 2.5 hours......unless the Open is on!.
Sailed up the M80 a couple of weeks ago when it took me just 4.5 hours to get from Cumbernauld to Dornoch at peak hours.
		
Click to expand...

Geography not a strong point either I take it. Manchester is not the midlands.

4.1/2 hours? Did you get stuck in traffic?


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Poor response from Mr Obama.
		
Click to expand...

Why? He's provided his opinion/preference. 



Liverpoolphil said:



			Salmond response was his usual
		
Click to expand...

aka Consistent!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 6, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Geography not a strong point either I take it. Manchester is not the midlands.

4.1/2 hours? Did you get stuck in traffic?
		
Click to expand...

In my defense M'lud I did say nearly the Midlands.

Not really stuck but there was a big 50mph section where they are putting in the new pylons.
I also tend to not break the speeding laws when I drive.....By the speed of some of my fellow travelers I can see why there is such  a big stushie about installing ASC's


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 6, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			aka Consistent!
		
Click to expand...

Consistently vague.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 6, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Consistently vague.
		
Click to expand...

While I'm definitely not a fan of FE, I can 'forgive' him that approach - or even applaud it!

If he went into the detail of everything that was asked, he'd not only end up getting bogged down by the shear weight of it, but also provide more ammo for the Nos to challenge - and also be setting out policy that he/his party may not be the ones voted to implement. There is a fairly good strategy in The White Paper, though it does miss some, to me, important bits - understandably stressing the benefits of independence rather more than the cost of transition, for example.

It's a key attribute of a political leader to convincingly present an idea while being vague about the actual detail, as generally the idea gets floated a considerabe length of time before the actual detailed legislation/policy appears - or even the manifesto statement! How often does the legislation actually truly reflect what the initial 'new' idea was? There always seems to be additional bits stuck (or snuck) in by the time it gets its First Reading!


----------



## Val (Jun 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In my defense M'lud I did say nearly the Midlands.

Not really stuck but there was a big 50mph section where they are putting in the new pylons.
I also tend to not break the speeding laws when I drive.....By the speed of some of my fellow travelers I can see why there is such  a big stushie about installing ASC's
		
Click to expand...

I suppose 100 miles is nearly 

How can you say traffic is quieter when the roads I highlighted you've never been on? Take it from me the M8 and M80 is equally as bad at peak times as any motorway in Northern England, I've never had any issues on the roads you mention and I do around 35'000 motorway miles a year.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 7, 2014)

I am never too sure of where t'North stops and the Midlands begin.......is there a boundary or any signs to look out for?


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I am never too sure of where t'North stops and the Midlands begin.......is there a boundary or any signs to look out for?
		
Click to expand...

Yep it's like the ones used in Scotland, common sence and knowledge. You need to get out more. Most Scots I know are well travelled.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 7, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Yep it's like the ones used in Scotland, common sence and knowledge. You need to get out more. Most Scots I know are well travelled.
		
Click to expand...


No need to be rude, I was just curious.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I am never too sure of where t'North stops and the Midlands begin.......is there a boundary or any signs to look out for?
		
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Midlands

I've been 'guilty' of thinking Liverpool/Manchester/Warrington as Midlands!

Stoke-on-Trent is probably the furthest North on the West (M6) side (Crew/Chesire is too far North). Sheffield is probably the border on the East - but is 'North'.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 7, 2014)

I can never understand why some towns/ cities are considered Northern [Sheffield] whilst more Northern towns [Grimsby] are Midlands.

Even funnier to us Scots is when the BBC weather man giving the UK weather report says 'and in the north' whilst pointing to Liverpool.
That's nearly South when it comes to the UK.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I am never too sure of where t'North stops and the Midlands begin.......is there a boundary or any signs to look out for?
		
Click to expand...

Well living in Surrey I think that Sheffield is in the north midlands - but folk down here think it's in the North of England.  Tends to highlight that few realise how much of England there is north o9f Sheffield.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 7, 2014)

Tends to support my thought that Manchester/Liverpool are nearly in the Midlands if the Oop North line is from the Humber to the Mersey.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Midlands

I've been 'guilty' of thinking Liverpool/Manchester/Warrington as Midlands!

Stoke-on-Trent is probably the furthest North on the West (M6) side (Crew/Chesire is too far North). Sheffield is probably the border on the East - but is 'North'.
		
Click to expand...

So Glockasshire is in the Midlands and Naarfolk is in the South..........that does not make any sense whatsoever.


----------



## Iaing (Jun 7, 2014)

It seems to me that Mr Obama is being a tad hypocritical, given that the Yanks shoot their load on the 4th of July.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So Glockasshire is in the Midlands and Naarfolk is in the South..........that does not make any sense whatsoever.
		
Click to expand...

Norf of Bristol is where the Elephants go to die!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 9, 2014)

100 days to go and I am still totally undecided which way to vote.

I think about 750,000 Scots are in the same frame of mind.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			100 days to go and I am still totally undecided which way to vote.

I think about 750,000 Scots are in the same frame of mind.
		
Click to expand...


Yup, and the level of debate needs to improve from everyone (except me  ) to allow folk to make their choice.

Re:Obama.I'm fine with him making his own opinion known, as long as everyone knows why he has that opinion.It's nothing to do with a romantic notion of The UK and everything to do with what Scotland within The UK offers America.


----------



## CMAC (Jun 9, 2014)

Alex Salmond is -once again - clutching at straws by saying Cameron 'told' Obama to interject in the Independence debate. I don't think you 'tell' the most powerful leader on the planet what to do.

I'd like to see a live debate with Salmond and Darling as they are the main leaders of each campaign


----------



## CMAC (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			100 days to go and I am still totally undecided which way to vote.

*I think about 750,000 Scots are in the same frame of mind*.
		
Click to expand...

havent got the stats, is that 13% of the population or thereabouts?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 9, 2014)

Pleasing to hear Darling tell the voters that all three parties supporting BT are now promising 'further powers' for the Scottish Parliament following a NO vote.

Interesting this change as Devo Max is not on the agenda - well it was rejected by Cameron for the referendum - have Cameron and Osborne validated these 'promises'?    So notwithstanding that it seems that Scots voters are being promised things that BT can't guarantee - just like what BT accuse the YES campaign of doing - BT now seem to have a crystal ball on what the status quo might morph into.  So BT need to tell us how these promises will impact upon the status quo - so including such as the Barnett formula funding, setting of interest rates etc.

BT seem to have move from the 'certainty' of the status quo i.e. you know what you are voting for when you vote NO - to a position when BT can no longer state that as they promise thing they cannot guarantee or have yet to define.  Let's see what BT say about this later today.


----------



## CMAC (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Pleasing to hear Darling tell the voters that all three parties supporting BT are now promising 'further powers' for the Scottish Parliament following a NO vote.

Interesting this change as Devo Max is not on the agenda - well it was rejected by Cameron for the referendum - have Cameron and Osborne validated these 'promises'?    So notwithstanding that it seems that *Scots voters are being promised things that BT can't guarantee *- just like what BT accuse the YES campaign of doing - BT now seem to have a crystal ball on what the status quo might morph into.  So BT need to tell us how these promises will impact upon the status quo - so including such as the Barnett formula funding, setting of interest rates etc.

BT seem to have move from the 'certainty' of the status quo i.e. you know what you are voting for when you vote NO - to a position when BT can no longer state that as they promise thing they cannot guarantee or have yet to define.  Let's see what BT say about this later today.
		
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree it looks more devo max type promises now, how do you know they cannot guarantee the promises they make in writing?


----------



## ger147 (Jun 9, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Whilst I agree it looks more devo max type promises now, how do you know they cannot guarantee the promises they make in writing?
		
Click to expand...

BT are not the government just now and will not be the next government after the next general election so any future government are not bound by anything Alistair Darling comes out with during the Scottish referendum debate.


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

ger147 said:



			BT are not the government just now and will not be the next government after the next general election so any future government are not bound by anything Alistair Darling comes out with during the Scottish referendum debate.
		
Click to expand...

Very true however BT are in a position to show what the collective parties of the UK can offer post NO which will be up to the current/next government to decide on post NO. Their is no guarantee SNP (although I agree it's likely) would be the first Scottish government, what is more certain is that the BT political supporters are in a better position to deliver promises than the SNP are if the vote is in either campaigns favour, the YES campaign post YES have a lot of major obstacles to get over before they can deliver on their promes (currency union, EU membership etc etc)


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Very true however BT are in a position to show what the collective parties of the UK can offer post NO which will be up to the current/next government to decide on post NO. Their is no guarantee SNP (although I agree it's likely) would be the first Scottish government, what is more certain is that the BT political supporters are in a better position to deliver promises than the SNP are if the vote is in either campaigns favour, the YES campaign post YES have a lot of major obstacles to get over before they can deliver on their promes (currency union, EU membership etc etc)
		
Click to expand...

What are BT doing promising things that they have zero ability to deliver - why do they not just stick with 'delivering' the status quo?  Are they not just muddying the waters on their side by making such 'promises' when voters know that it woulds be up to Westminster what, if any, extra powers Holyrood might get.  And in BT indirectly highlighting that fact, does that not play directly into the hands of the YES campaign?


----------



## DCB (Jun 9, 2014)

Thank goodness we've only got another 100 days of this


----------



## ger147 (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Very true however BT are in a position to show what the collective parties of the UK can offer post NO which will be up to the current/next government to decide on post NO. Their is no guarantee SNP (although I agree it's likely) would be the first Scottish government, what is more certain is that the BT political supporters are in a better position to deliver promises than the SNP are if the vote is in either campaigns favour, the YES campaign post YES have a lot of major obstacles to get over before they can deliver on their promes (currency union, EU membership etc etc)
		
Click to expand...

I was simply responding to the point about BT making promises i.e. they will absolutely NOT nor ever will be in a position to deliver them or be held accountable for them, as logically they should disappear after the vote as their reason for existence will itself have ceased to exist.

If there is a Yes vote, I agree that the current and next Scottish government will have an awful lot of work to do to try and deliver against any promises they have made but Alistair Darling will no doubt be swanning around the House of Lords after the vote no matter the outcome.


----------



## ger147 (Jun 9, 2014)

DCB said:



			Thank goodness we've only got another 100 days of this 

Click to expand...

Here, here!!


----------



## JamPal (Jun 9, 2014)

DCB said:



			Thank goodness we've only got another 100 days of this 

Click to expand...

Amen. I run a very busy forum (hifiwigwam.com) and this debate has sent us all potty, especially the mod team. 

For me, I hope the union remains intact, I think that will be better for Scotland and for the rest of the UK in the long run. However, if the indies are in majority we will just have to man up and take the rejection and move on from it.


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			What are BT doing promising things that they have zero ability to deliver - why do they not just stick with 'delivering' the status quo?  Are they not just muddying the waters on their side by making such 'promises' when voters know that it woulds be up to Westminster what, if any, extra powers Holyrood might get.  And in BT indirectly highlighting that fact, does that not play directly into the hands of the YES campaign?
		
Click to expand...

Why have they zero ability in delivering?


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I was simply responding to the point about BT making promises i.e. they will absolutely NOT nor ever will be in a position to deliver them or be held accountable for them, as logically they should disappear after the vote as their reason for existence will itself have ceased to exist.

If there is a Yes vote, I agree that the current and next Scottish government will have an awful lot of work to do to try and deliver against any promises they have made but Alistair Darling will no doubt be swanning around the House of Lords after the vote no matter the outcome.
		
Click to expand...

I'll ask you too, why will they never be in a position to deliver the promises?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 9, 2014)

Well hopefully with BT trying to be +ve and coming out of the closet with 'future powers' for Holyrood statements then voters in Scotland will have a choice of uncertainties.  Will be interesting to hear how BT play 'new tax raising powers' off against 'Barnett formula funding'.  Because you can't have the former unless you reduce or remove the latter.


----------



## ger147 (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I'll ask you too, why will they never be in a position to deliver the promises?
		
Click to expand...

BT are not and never will be the government.  More powers for Holyrood can only be delivered by the government in Westminster.


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well hopefully with BT trying to be +ve and coming out of the closet with 'future powers' for Holyrood statements then voters in Scotland will have a choice of uncertainties.  Will be interesting to hear how BT play 'new tax raising powers' off against 'Barnett formula funding'.  Because you can't have the former unless you reduce or remove the latter.
		
Click to expand...

If this is aimed at me, it doesn't answer my question. Why do they "have zero ability to deliver"?


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 9, 2014)

JamPal said:



			Amen. I run a very busy forum (hifiwigwam.com) and this debate has sent us all potty, especially the mod team.
		
Click to expand...

This thread has been a fantastic credit to the level-headedness of all participants imo! Can't actually remember any mod-ing activity being required - or maybe i missed it! I doubt any other thread where opinions can be so 'opposite' would go nearly 2500 posts without a lot of moderation! Long (well, 100 days or so) may it continue!


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

ger147 said:



			BT are not and never will be the government.  More powers for Holyrood can only be delivered by the government in Westminster.
		
Click to expand...

The BT campaign has plenty of serving government ministers who can deliver, Darling is just a front man.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I'll ask you too, why will they never be in a position to deliver the promises?
		
Click to expand...

Because (stating the obvious) the BT Campaign isn't Westminster and we haven't heard anything from Cameron and Osborne backing up the BT statements - especially given they rejected giving the Scottish electorate the choice of Devo Max in the referendum.  And Labour? LibDems? UKIP?  What are their policies in respect of moving towards devo max?


----------



## ger147 (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			The BT campaign has plenty of serving government ministers who can deliver, Darling is just a front man.
		
Click to expand...

BT cannot deliver, only the government can, it's as simple as that.


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Because (stating the obvious) the BT Campaign isn't Westminster and we haven't heard anything from Cameron and Osborne backing up the BT statements - especially given they rejected giving the Scottish electorate the choice of Devo Max in the referendum.  And Labour? LibDems? UKIP?  What are their policies in respect of moving towards devo max?
		
Click to expand...

Of course it's not but it has Westminister's support or you wouldn't get the promises made. I couldn't make promises to customers if i didn't have the backing of my bosses.


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

ger147 said:



			BT cannot deliver, only the government can, it's as simple as that.
		
Click to expand...

I'm aware of that, do you think BT has nothing to do with the government?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Because (stating the obvious) the BT Campaign isn't Westminster and we haven't heard anything from Cameron and Osborne backing up the BT statements - *especially given they rejected giving the Scottish electorate the choice of Devo Max in the referendum*.  And Labour? LibDems? UKIP?  What are their policies in respect of moving towards devo max?
		
Click to expand...

I wish you'd stop being so disingenuous on this point. A third option on the referendum would just have muddied the water and potentially allowed independence to win even if the majority voted against it.


----------



## ger147 (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I'm aware of that...
		
Click to expand...

Then my work is done.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well hopefully with BT trying to be +ve and coming out of the closet with 'future powers' for Holyrood statements then voters in Scotland will have a choice of uncertainties.  Will be interesting to hear how BT play 'new tax raising powers' off against 'Barnett formula funding'.  Because you can't have the former unless you reduce or remove the latter.
		
Click to expand...

Why reduce it?

If the argument that Scotland isn't getting a fair deal under that formula (and I'm not saying they are/aren't) is correct - because the relative wealth of the countries is not the same, then the formula should be adjusted away from simple population percentage. It was, after all, merely the simplest approach/starting point and even Barnett has suggested that it should be 'tweaked' as it was only a 'short-term solution'!



Valentino said:



			I'm aware of that, do you think BT has nothing to do with the government?
		
Click to expand...

It's in the fortunate position of being sufficiently associated with the government to suggest that what it says is/will be government policy without actually committing the government to anything it 'promises'! To me, it's the epitome of political marketing - nothing it promises can be depended upon/trusted to be implemented, even if it's deemed absolutely the right thing to do! Best to consider it a very well connected lobby group imo!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Of course it's not but it has Westminister's support or you wouldn't get the promises made. I couldn't make promises to customers if i didn't have the backing of my bosses.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure if I am at all convinced that BT's promises have Westminster backing and will to deliver.  I might be convinced if I heard David Cameron or George Osborne make the promises.  And also Milliband, Clegg and Farangle state their backing and party positions.


----------



## JamPal (Jun 9, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			This thread has been a fantastic credit to the level-headedness of all participants imo! Can't actually remember any mod-ing activity being required - or maybe i missed it! I doubt any other thread where opinions can be so 'opposite' would go nearly 2500 posts without a lot of moderation! Long (well, 100 days or so) may it continue!
		
Click to expand...

That IS remarkable. I wish the same could be said of the many locked threads on my site. :-/


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 9, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Why reduce it?

If the argument that Scotland isn't getting a fair deal under that formula (and I'm not saying they are/aren't) is correct - because the relative wealth of the countries is not the same, then the formula should be adjusted away from simple population percentage. It was, after all, merely the simplest approach/starting point and even Barnett has suggested that it should be 'tweaked' as it was only a 'short-term solution'!
		
Click to expand...

I agree - but it would have to change in some way.  And say if Holyrood were able to keep all taxes raised in Scotland would Westminster still make a 'grant' of some form to Holyrood and what would it be and on what basis would it be calculated.  Because such matters will clearly affect in some way BT's Â£1400 better off if NO (or was it more a case of not Â£1400 worse off if YES)


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Then my work is done.
		
Click to expand...

You didn't answer my question so no it's not


----------



## ger147 (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You didn't answer my question so no it's not 

Click to expand...

I don't have to as I made no comment on anything other than BT's inability to deliver as it's not the government which you agreed with.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 9, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			This thread has been a fantastic credit to the level-headedness of all participants imo! Can't actually remember any mod-ing activity being required - or maybe i missed it! I doubt any other thread where opinions can be so 'opposite' would go nearly 2500 posts without a lot of moderation! Long (well, 100 days or so) may it continue!
		
Click to expand...

I started the Rangers thread and this one.
I think the Rangers post went to 5,000 + posts and scrillions of views.
The Rangers one was lightly modded as well, big cheer to the Mods for allowing two potential powder kegs from exploding.


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not sure if I am at all convinced that BT's promises have Westminster backing and will to deliver.  I might be convinced if I heard David Cameron or George Osborne make the promises.  And also Milliband, Clegg and Farangle state their backing and party positions.
		
Click to expand...

The independence referendum is not about parties it's a straight yes or no, all these people have stated they want the union to remain intact.

Do you seriously believe what the BT campaign are saying have not been spoken of in government circles?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			The independence referendum is not about parties it's a straight yes or no, all these people have stated they want the union to remain intact.

Do you seriously believe what the BT campaign are saying have not been spoken of in government circles?
		
Click to expand...

Spoken of is one thing - them ever happening is another.  Let's just hear Cameron state it then I'll believe that they have actually been spoken about and that the Tories have a commitment to deliver additional powers towards devo max.

If devo max was the great thing that BT now tell us then why the heck wasn't it offered to the electorate in the referendum.  It wasn't offered because Westminster had a pretty good idea it would be what would be voted for and Westminster doesn't want to grant it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 9, 2014)

One of my fears is that Scotland win Independence and then Labour win the next Scottish election.

I doubt if the present Scottish Labour crowd would manage to run a cold bath.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 9, 2014)

...and then there is this sort of nonsense (from today's Herald)

_In other developments yesterday, Lord West, former First Sea Lord and Labour security minister said independence posed "the greatest grand strategic threat to the security and defence of our islands".

He added: "There is no doubt whatsoever that if Scotland separated it would diminish our ability to defend these islands."_


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Spoken of is one thing - them ever happening is another.  Let's just hear Cameron state it then I'll believe that they have actually been spoken about and that the Tories have a commitment to deliver additional powers towards devo max.
		
Click to expand...

You constantly state you want positivity from the BT campaign, now we get positivity from the BT campaign, your response is you don't believe them


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You constantly state you want positivity from the BT campaign, now we get positivity from the BT campaign, your response is you don't believe them 

Click to expand...

Well if it was what they wanted for Scotland they would have offered the option in the referendum.  It wasn't offered because Westminster doesn't want to grant Holyrood the extra powers - so why should we start believing they have had a damascene moment and that they now realise that they were wrong all along about devo max.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You constantly state you want positivity from the BT campaign, now we get positivity from the BT campaign, your response is you don't believe them 

Click to expand...

Not sure about positivity.
In my mind positivity would have been allowing DevoMax on the ballot paper in the first place.
Now we have a panic move because the Darling boy has made a series of momentous mess ups and it looks like the Nats just may have a chance of winning.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and then there is this sort of nonsense (from today's Herald)

_In other developments yesterday, Lord West, former First Sea Lord and Labour security minister said independence posed "the greatest grand strategic threat to the security and defence of our islands".

He added: "There is no doubt whatsoever that if Scotland separated it would diminish our ability to defend these islands."_

Click to expand...

It's no more nonsense than your sprouting. It's just one mans opinion, just like yours. I doubt if there are many people have even heard of Lord West let alone worry about what he has to say.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 9, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			It's no more nonsense than your sprouting. It's just one mans opinion, just like yours. I doubt if there are many people have even heard of Lord West let alone worry about what he has to say.
		
Click to expand...

With my spouting I just seek information and clarity - I don't tend to say whether I agree or not.  So with these statements from BT - I say excellent - a bit of +ve'ity from BT - but let's have some flesh around what they are saying and hear some commitment from Westminster to deliver.

Just as a statement providing information - what Lord West says is tosh as it gives me absolutely no information on why what he says would be the case.  Give me an explanation and I might well agree with him.


----------



## DCB (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			One of my fears is that Scotland win Independence and then Labour win the next Scottish election.

I doubt if the present Scottish Labour crowd would manage to run a cold bath.
		
Click to expand...

Also a likely scenario if there's a No vote and SNP implode with the ritual infighting that would no doubt follow such a result.

As long as King Eck doesn't explode, that could be messy


----------



## c1973 (Jun 9, 2014)

I wish this vote was bloody yesterday! 

This whole debate (in general, not necessarily this thread but I suppose some of the following applies here) is based around spin, mistrust, half truths, deception, downright lies, made up nonsense and (in my personal opinion) barely concealed racism*. 

The sooner it is finished the better. I'm sick Fed up of politicians and their lickspittles telling me 'the people of Scotland want/don't want whatever'. Who the ...... are they to say what anyone wants? They haven't got a bleedin clue what the average person wants/needs/thinks, not one bloody clue! Millions spent on the most blatantly obvious propaganda that could have been put to much better use and that's not counting the Civil servants man hours that could have been better utilised. An absolute joke imo.

I refuse to believe either side is 100% correct 100% of the time, yet not once have I heard them agree on any single point. If this is the standard of our 'leaders' then I would suggest it's a revolution we need, not a vote!

Rant over!

* based on plentiful conversations I've had, or had the misfortune to have overhead.


----------



## CMAC (Jun 9, 2014)

DCB said:



			Also a likely scenario if there's a No vote and SNP implode with the ritual infighting that would no doubt follow such a result.

As long as King Eck doesn't explode, that could be messy 

Click to expand...

if you knew (maybe you do) anyone in the snr SNP party you would realise how ludicrous that statement is.


----------



## chrisd (Jun 9, 2014)

c1973 said:



			I wish this vote was bloody yesterday! 

This whole debate (in general, not necessarily this thread but I suppose some of the following applies here) is based around spin, mistrust, half truths, deception, downright lies, made up nonsense and (in my personal opinion) barely concealed racism*. 

The sooner it is finished the better. I'm sick Fed up of politicians and their lickspittles telling me 'the people of Scotland want/don't want whatever'. Who the ...... are they to say what anyone wants? They haven't got a bleedin clue what the average person wants/needs/thinks, not one bloody clue! Millions spent on the most blatantly obvious propaganda that could have been put to much better use and that's not counting the Civil servants man hours that could have been better utilised. An absolute joke imo.

I refuse to believe either side is 100% correct 100% of the time, yet not once have I heard them agree on any single point. If this is the standard of our 'leaders' then I would suggest it's a revolution we need, not a vote!

Rant over!

* based on plentiful conversations I've had, or had the misfortune to have overhead.
		
Click to expand...



I just wish the vote was to be a question of whether the Scots would be happier deciding their own future/fate rather than "will we be financially better or worse off" as the over riding factor. Any financial better or worse off is likely to change over the coming years and decades, it will never amount to  a huge difference either way. Surely the vote shouldn't be solely based on that point alone, if it was a Union purely based on economics, why do we not get a vote in the other Union countries as to whether we want to be in or out, and whether we wish to support, or be supported, by the other member countries?


----------



## CMAC (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and then there is this sort of nonsense (from today's Herald)

_In other developments yesterday, Lord West, former First Sea Lord and Labour security minister said independence posed "the greatest grand strategic threat to the security and defence of our islands".

He added: "There is no doubt whatsoever that if Scotland separated it would diminish our ability to defend these islands."_

Click to expand...

couldnt agree more with Lord West. You know you can agree or disagree with the sentiment of a headline statement without having the 'N'th degree of detail. He certainly will be speaking from a position of knowledge we are not privvy to for obvious reasons.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and then there is this sort of nonsense (from today's Herald)

_In other developments yesterday, Lord West, former First Sea Lord and Labour security minister said independence posed "the greatest grand strategic threat to the security and defence of our islands".

He added: "There is no doubt whatsoever that if Scotland separated it would diminish our ability to defend these islands."_

Click to expand...

Without seeing the detail, I'd say those comments stand to reason...


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not sure about positivity.
In my mind positivity would have been allowing DevoMax on the ballot paper in the first place.
Now we have a panic move because the Darling boy has made a series of momentous mess ups and it looks like the Nats just may have a chance of winning.
		
Click to expand...

What nonsense. A third option on the referendum would only have served to place a big question mark over the result.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I started the Rangers thread and this one.
I think the Rangers post went to 5,000 + posts and scrillions of views.
*The Rangers one was lightly modded as well, big cheer to the Mods* for allowing two potential powder kegs from exploding.
		
Click to expand...

Long suspected but now confirmed you really are just at the wind-up!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 9, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			What nonsense. A third option on the referendum would only have served to place a big question mark over the result.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure how?
Say 70% of Scots voted for DevoMax what would the question be?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not sure how?
Say 70% of Scots voted for DevoMax what would the question be?
		
Click to expand...

And if 40% vote independence, 30% for Devo Max, 30% Status Quo? We end up independent even though 60% of voters didn't want that.

Anything other than a straight yes/no would have been a nonsense.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Just as a statement providing information - what Lord West says is tosh as it gives me absolutely no information on why what he says would be the case.  Give me an explanation and I might well agree with him.
		
Click to expand...

Logical really,if you have no control over the policies or military who are on your border they become are vulnerable point within in your defences. As there is no guarantee that an iscot will be either in EU or NATO it could mean we (RUK) would be vulnerable along our border.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not sure how?
Say 70% of Scots voted for DevoMax what would the question be?
		
Click to expand...


Or, another way of looking at it is this; say 33% vote for devo, 33% vote no and 34% vote yes. That way the yes vote wins despite the vast majority not wanting it. It was one question to keep it simple and to avoid this scenario. A blind man on a galloping horse could see that!

Devo max can be argued for/against and agreed between the respective governments, no need for a referendum on that particular question.


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			And if 40% vote independence, 30% for Devo Max, 30% Status Quo? We end up independent even though 60% of voters didn't want that.

Anything other than a straight yes/no would have been a nonsense.
		
Click to expand...

Is the correct answer, a blind man can see a third option would have been a nonsense.


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Or, another way of looking at it is this; say 33% vote for devo, 33% vote no and 34% vote yes. That way the yes vote wins despite the vast majority not wanting it. It was one question to keep it simple and to avoid this scenario. A blind man on a galloping horse could see that!

Devo max can be argued for/against and agreed between the respective governments, no need for a referendum on that particular question.
		
Click to expand...

You beat me to it, you are a wise man


----------



## c1973 (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You beat me to it, you are a wise man 

Click to expand...

Indeed. And one without a horse or problems of an ocular nature to boot.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 9, 2014)

Can you see a Westminster Government agreeing to DevoMax terms without the threat of an Independence vote.
Call me Mr Cynical but I can't.


----------



## Alan (Jun 9, 2014)

Incredible bias from Sky News tonight, do they think the Scots are stupid? Why won't they report the online polls from two of Scotland's biggest newspapers today putting the Yes vote at 91%


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 9, 2014)

Alan said:



			Incredible bias from Sky News tonight, do they think the Scots are stupid? Why won't they report the online polls from two of Scotland's biggest newspapers today putting the Yes vote at 91%
		
Click to expand...

Na, you're going to have to be more specific. I've guessed three potential newspapers you might be referring to and can't find this on any of their sites? Got a link?

Regardless, 91%, if you believe that you are stupid. Not a very scientific survey, I'd hazard!


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 9, 2014)

Alan said:



			Incredible bias from Sky News tonight, do they think the Scots are stupid? Why won't they report the online polls from two of Scotland's biggest newspapers today putting the Yes vote at 91%
		
Click to expand...

Not what BBC are saying, 42%. Seems along way short of your 91%.


----------



## williamalex1 (Jun 9, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Not what BBC are saying, 42%. Seems along way short of your 91%.
		
Click to expand...

The BBC are one of the reasons that some Scots will be voting yes. Not me of course, but i do get annoyed at their biased television programme choices.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 9, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Not what BBC are saying, 42%. Seems along way short of your 91%.
		
Click to expand...

Jings auld skier I'm surprised you fell for that one.
They also quoted 58% for No...........call me Mr Cynical again but that makes 100%.
That must mean that we have all made our minds up.

Even Gordon Brown from the No camp has said this evening that the UK Treasury have been very patronising to the Scots.
He also thinks that the UK Prime Minister should debate the issues with the Scottish First Minister.


----------



## CMAC (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Jings auld skier I'm surprised you fell for that one.
They also quoted 58% for No...........call me Mr Cynical again but that makes 100%.
That must mean that we have all made our minds up.

Even *Gordon Brown* from the No camp has said this evening that the UK Treasury have been very patronising to the Scots.
*He also thinks that the UK Prime Minister should debate the issues with the Scottish First Minister*.
		
Click to expand...

Can you point to where he said that? I thought I saw an interview broadcast this morning where he said he thinks Darling should debate with Salmond. I could of course have misheard.


----------



## Imurg (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Jings auld skier I'm surprised you fell for that one.
They also quoted 58% for No...........call me Mr Cynical again but that makes 100%.
That must mean that we have all made our minds up.
		
Click to expand...

If you'd bothered to listen they actually said it was an average of the last 6 polls and only included those who had made up their mind....

Not sure what that really shows except those who have decided want to stay.


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Can you see a Westminster Government agreeing to DevoMax terms without the threat of an Independence vote.
Call me Mr Cynical but I can't.
		
Click to expand...

But there is an independence vote


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 9, 2014)

Imurg said:



			If you'd bothered to listen they actually said it was an average of the last 6 polls and only included those who had made up their mind....

Not sure what that really shows except those who have decided want to stay.
		
Click to expand...

Eh.... aimed at me or Old skier?


----------



## Val (Jun 9, 2014)

Alan said:



			Incredible bias from Sky News tonight, do they think the Scots are stupid? Why won't they report the online polls from two of Scotland's biggest newspapers today putting the Yes vote at 91%
		
Click to expand...

Hold on till I wipe the tears of laughter away, did you say 91% voting yes?


----------



## Imurg (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Eh.... aimed at me or Old skier?
		
Click to expand...

Whoever.......he quoted 42, you quoted 58.......


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Even Gordon Brown from the No camp has said this evening that the UK Treasury have been very patronising to the Scots.
He also thinks that the UK Prime Minister should debate the issues with the Scottish First Minister.
		
Click to expand...

I'll be a negative Yes voter on this one.
He is from the Dark Side, bankrupts a country, has never told a truth in his life and should be force fed porridge for the rest of his life. He's spent his life telling porkies.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 9, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			The BBC are one of the reasons that some Scots will be voting yes. Not me of course, but i do get annoyed at their biased television programme choices.
		
Click to expand...

Biased, it was a news programme FFS not Midsummer Murders.


----------



## williamalex1 (Jun 9, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Biased, it was a news programme FFS not Midsummer Murders.
		
Click to expand...

Not just the news , watching the one show tonight and what did we get 1966 world cup again. How about showing the 1967 England v Scotland game more often.:clap:


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 9, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Not just the news , watching the one show tonight and what did we get 1966 world cup again. How about showing the 1967 England v Scotland game more often.:clap:
		
Click to expand...

I was away for that one, did something unusual happen or did England win again.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 9, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Not just the news , watching the one show tonight and what did we get 1966 world cup again. How about showing the 1967 England v Scotland game more often.:clap:
		
Click to expand...

Brace yourself, then, the 50th anniversary is almost upon us!

:rofl:


----------



## williamalex1 (Jun 9, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Brace yourself, then, the 50th anniversary is almost upon us!

:rofl:
		
Click to expand...

:thup:


----------



## Iaing (Jun 9, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Not just the news , watching the one show tonight and what did we get 1966 world cup again. How about showing the 1967 England v Scotland game more often.:clap:
		
Click to expand...

BBC News 24 yesterday seemed to reckon that they've won the world cup twice. Nearly shot myself.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 9, 2014)

Iaing said:



			BBC News 24 yesterday seemed to reckon that they've won the world cup twice. Nearly shot myself.
		
Click to expand...

Damn!


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 9, 2014)

Iaing said:



			BBC News 24 yesterday seemed to reckon that they've won the world cup twice. Nearly shot myself.
		
Click to expand...

Got to be in it to win


----------



## williamalex1 (Jun 9, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Got to be in it to win
		
Click to expand...

 Old Skier I actually thought you were Welsh  , sorry .


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 9, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I was away for that one, did something unusual happen or did England win again.
		
Click to expand...

Jim Baxter had a wee game of keepy uppy in the middle of the park and his team mates toyed with the World Champions before giving them a comprehensive drubbing.

Seems like only yesterday to me.

1966 in black and white
1967 in colour.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqhNqNtCinM

Great finish from The Lawman.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 9, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Old Skier I actually thought you were Welsh  , sorry .
		
Click to expand...

I am, and if Scotland manage to get there again I would wish them all the best as well. Just not to keen on some of the stuff that kicks of when the dreaded England word is whispered.
Normally when I am asked my nationality I say British.


----------



## williamalex1 (Jun 9, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I am, and if Scotland manage to get there again I would wish them all the best as well. Just not to keen on some of the stuff that kicks of when the dreaded England word is whispered.
Normally when I am asked my nationality I say British.
		
Click to expand...

 Me too, but i still would prefer to see MY own national team shown on BBC  SCOTLAND when and if their playing,   not some other foreign team .


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Hold on till I wipe the tears of laughter away, did you say 91% voting yes?
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:
Maybe they went into the SNP Caf and asked 11 people!


----------



## Iaing (Jun 9, 2014)

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-poll-100-days-go-3664811

:rofl::rofl:


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 10, 2014)

Iaing said:



http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-poll-100-days-go-3664811

:rofl::rofl:
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, another poll on the same site has 100% support for terry butcher staying on as Hibs manager.


----------



## ger147 (Jun 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Yeah, another poll on the same site has 100% support for terry butcher staying on as Hibs manager.
		
Click to expand...

Two stories on the same day not about Rangers or Celtic? They are deffo branching out in to a brave new world!!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 10, 2014)

The BT Slogan - *NO thanks* - is fine and dandy if you are a committed NO - but to me feels maybe a little bit too 'dismissive' of a YES if you are unsure?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 10, 2014)

Iaing said:



http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-poll-100-days-go-3664811

:rofl::rofl:
		
Click to expand...

Just for a laugh I've tried to vote multiple time son that poll...and succeeded.Highjacked by the lunatic fringes and not based on any kind of reality.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 10, 2014)

Telegraph started some interesting journalism yesterday, this is a view from the Yes side ( guess No will be tomorrow)

http://s.telegraph.co.uk/graphics/projects/scotland-the-yes-voters/index.html


----------



## c1973 (Jun 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The BT Slogan - *NO thanks* - is fine and dandy if you are a committed NO - but to me feels maybe a little bit too 'dismissive' of a YES if you are unsure?
		
Click to expand...

:rofl::rofl:

And how would you suggest you say no in a non dismissive way?  Jesus, I've read some nonsense, pedantic and nit picking posts on this thread, but that one surely takes the biscuit.

Do you think yes feels a bit too accepting if you are unsure?


----------



## CMAC (Jun 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Brace yourself, then, the 50th anniversary is almost upon us!

:rofl:
		
Click to expand...

but that will pale as they will win this years world cup...hopefully. I for one will be right behind them.:whoo:


Why would anyone British not be? (dont anyone answer as I know there are many bigoted myopic individuals out there)


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 10, 2014)

c1973 said:



			:rofl::rofl:

And how would you suggest you say no in a non dismissive way?  Jesus, I've read some nonsense, pedantic and nit picking posts on this thread, but that one surely takes the biscuit.

Do you think yes feels a bit too accepting if you are unsure? 

Click to expand...

I'm just saying the impression I take from the slogan - nothing else.  I'm not saying it's wrong.  They could simply have a poster/flag with the word NO on it.  If BT are happy with it then great.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 10, 2014)

CMAC said:



			but that will pale as they will win this years world cup...hopefully. I for one will be right behind them.:whoo:


Why would anyone British not be? (dont anyone answer as I know there are many bigoted myopic individuals out there)
		
Click to expand...

You know, you can't just type up some utter tripe and tell people not to respond. Nothing bigoted about not supporting England at football, nothing at all.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 10, 2014)

CMAC said:



			but that will pale as they will win this years world cup...hopefully. I for one will be right behind them.:whoo:


Why would anyone British not be? (dont anyone answer as I know there are many *bigoted myopic individuals out there*)
		
Click to expand...

takes one to know one, I suppose.

I hope England getting heartily pumped in every sporting activity they play, in particular football and rugby...my English dad tells me when Scotland are good enough to qualify for any kind of international tournament he'll wish the same fate on Scotland...its called rivalry.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 10, 2014)

I'm also not that convinced that the NO slogan 'Best of Both Worlds' is that great.  Some down here see that as suggesting that Scotland gets to decide what it spends it's money on (so for example on free tuition fees, prescriptions, elderly care) whilst being subsidised by England.  And some down here don't like that idea.

Just reflecting views of some of my mates in the club.  But if BT are happy with it then good.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'm also not that convinced that the NO slogan 'Best of Both Worlds' is that great.  Some down here see that as suggesting that Scotland gets to decide what it spends it's money on (so for example on free tuition fees, prescriptions, elderly care) whilst being subsidised by England.  And some down here don't like that idea.

Just reflecting views of some of my mates in the club.  But if BT are happy with it then good.
		
Click to expand...

No thanks...........it is the way it is said and interpreted that counts..........I thought it was quite clever.

Re England support, seems to me that England, like Scotland, have quite a few of their own countrymen/women who do not support them. Does that make them bigots to, or is that too hard to work out?


----------



## Slab (Jun 10, 2014)

CMAC said:



			but that will pale as they will win this years world cup...hopefully. I for one will be right behind them.:whoo:


*Why would anyone British not be?* (dont anyone answer as I know there are many bigoted myopic individuals out there)
		
Click to expand...

Ridiculous!

The team are not there representing Britain they are there representing England (& I'd imagine plenty proud to do so).... 

ABE :whoo:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 10, 2014)

I'll be supporting England 100% all the way to the final - then I have a decision to make.  Though I'm pretty sure what that'll be I can't be sure until the day arrives.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'll be supporting England 100% all the way to the final - then I have a decision to make.  Though I'm pretty sure what that'll be I can't be sure until the day arrives.
		
Click to expand...

Reminds me of a classic Creedence song......


----------



## c1973 (Jun 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Reminds me of a classic Creedence song......
		
Click to expand...

I've actually just put CCR Fortunate Son on whilst reading this.


----------



## Val (Jun 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'm also not that convinced that the NO slogan 'Best of Both Worlds' is that great.  Some down here see that as suggesting that Scotland gets to decide what it spends it's money on (so for example on free tuition fees, prescriptions, elderly care) whilst being subsidised by England.  And some down here don't like that idea.

Just reflecting views of some of my mates in the club.  But if BT are happy with it then good.
		
Click to expand...

In the same way people living in other parts of the UK get to spend their money how they wish, whilst accepting a share of the revenue generated from Scottish resources. 

It works both way.


----------



## Val (Jun 10, 2014)

In relation to the World Cup, I'll be supporting Italy, the same way I do with every team Italy play against (except Scotland of course) before any of you feel i'm being anti English.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			You know, you can't just type up some utter tripe and tell people not to respond. Nothing bigoted about not supporting England at football, nothing at all.
		
Click to expand...

But it can be!   It's the context in which it's framed that makes a difference.    'Not supporting' is quite ok, it's a matter of choice. Not supporting only because it's 'The English' is a different matter, thats more a case of racial hatred to which I am sure you do not subscribe?


----------



## CMAC (Jun 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			You know, you can't just type up some utter tripe and tell people not to respond. Nothing bigoted about not supporting England at football, nothing at all.
		
Click to expand...

whats utter tripe about supporting England at the world cup? I asked the bigots and myopic minded need not reply- seems they didnt take notice


----------



## CMAC (Jun 10, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			But it can be!   It's the context in which it's framed that makes a difference.    'Not supporting' is quite ok, it's a matter of choice. Not supporting only because it's 'The English' is a different matter, thats more a case of racial hatred to which I am sure you do not subscribe?
		
Click to expand...

well said!
fairwaydodger has made it quite clear in other posts she is against the England team just because its England, pathetic!  (really could do with a shakes head smiley)


----------



## CMAC (Jun 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			takes one to know one, I suppose.

I hope England getting heartily pumped in every sporting activity they play, in particular football and rugby...my English dad tells me when Scotland are good enough to qualify for any kind of international tournament he'll wish the same fate on Scotland...its called rivalry.
		
Click to expand...

surprised at this post, I never took you for this blinkered view but thanks for clearing that up.

For the avoidance of doubt I am not bigoted or myopic so I'd thank you for not casting this wrong assertion.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 10, 2014)

CMAC said:



			whats utter tripe about supporting England at the world cup? I asked the bigots and myopic minded need not reply- seems they didnt take notice

Click to expand...

What's tripe is your assertion that any British person who isn't supporting England is a bigot.

And, as I said, don't write a pile of horse manure and tell people not to reply, that's not how it works. If you post something moronic you can expect to be called on it. And you have been!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 10, 2014)

Was it the last world cup when we Scots could say that we were supporting Scotland in the world Cup Finals.


I think it was  a lad called Scotland who was playing for Falkirk [or maybe St Johnstone] and T&T.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 10, 2014)

CMAC said:



			surprised at this post, I never took you for this blinkered view but thanks for clearing that up.

For the avoidance of doub*t I am not bigoted or myopic* so I'd thank you for not casting this wrong assertion.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure anyone can make that kind of assertion about themselves, it's how others view them, I think?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Was it the last world cup when we Scots could say that we were supporting Scotland in the world Cup Finals.


I think it was  a lad called Scotland who was playing for Falkirk [or maybe St Johnstone] and T&T.
		
Click to expand...

Played for Saints - and currently for Accies

I will support England as my wife is English and children consider themselves as being English.  And wife and son are dead keen England supporters and why would I want them to be miserable with England performances and getting knocked out?  So I put away in the cupboard all my historical pleasure at wanting England to be rubbish and get beat by all and sundry - because I have found that actually family is more important than what I might feel about the England footie team.

And so all the way to the final and at that point I have to decide whether I can face the hysterical reaction of all and the media of England winning - and hearing about it for the rest of my life.  But hey - there are many things in life more important than football and any historical prejudices I might have held.  And so I will probably want England to win - but I can't be sure.  Tell you in about 4 weeks time.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			What's tripe is your assertion that any British person who isn't supporting England is a bigot.

And, as I said, don't write a pile of horse manure and tell people not to reply, that's not how it works. If you post something moronic you can expect to be called on it. And you have been!
		
Click to expand...



What am I then - an Englishman not supporting England ?! Can I still be a bigot ?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 10, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What am I then - an Englishman not supporting England ?! Can I still be a bigot ?
		
Click to expand...

You're picking a fight with the wrong person here, Phil. I'm not calling anyone a bigot.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			You're picking a fight with the wrong person here, Phil. I'm not calling anyone a bigot.
		
Click to expand...


Sorry I wasn't "countering" your post as such - was just adding to highlight your point about tripe being posted :thup:


----------



## One Planer (Jun 10, 2014)

I've tidied some of the bickering on this thread.

Please keep to on track ........ And civil


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 10, 2014)

..and back to the Scotland debate. So YES - Jason Scotland did a good job for Saints whilst he was there...


----------



## CMAC (Jun 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			What's tripe is your assertion that* any British person who isn't supporting England is a bigot.*

And, as I said, don't write a pile of horse manure and tell people not to reply, that's not how it works. If you post something moronic you can expect to be called on it. And you have been!
		
Click to expand...

I didnt say that, you made a HUGE leap there, now THAT is a moronic and idiotic thing to do- called back- your turn!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 10, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I didnt say that, you made a HUGE leap there, now THAT is a moronic and idiotic thing to do- called back- your turn!
		
Click to expand...

Hmm.... it was the definite implication of your post.

I think I'll just go with the tried and tested riposte....... grow up!


----------



## CMAC (Jun 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Hmm.... it was the definite implication of your post.

I think I'll just go with the tried and tested riposte....... grow up!
		
Click to expand...

boobies!


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Jun 10, 2014)

About to dish out some points unless certain people here grow up and stop bickering
Final warning


----------



## IanG (Jun 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Yeah, another poll on the same site has 100% support for terry butcher staying on as Hibs manager.
		
Click to expand...

Now gone, according to the beeb ...


----------



## CMAC (Jun 10, 2014)

PhilTheFragger said:



			About to dish out some points unless certain people here grow up and stop bickering
Final warning
		
Click to expand...

its discussion and counter discussion, not bickering.

right, off to straighten my woggle before akela finds out, you know what she's like when she's angry!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 10, 2014)

Come on folks this thread is about the effect Scottish independence will or will not have on the UK.

It has been enlightening to me and I hope others please try to keep it that way.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 10, 2014)

So if it's a NO this time - in 15 years or so time do the Scottish electorate get another go?  Who says a NO is forever.  A YES might be - but a NO?  Meanwhile to get a NO this time throw the Scottish electorate sweeties suggesting a path to DevoMax - except they'll realise DevoMax is what the sweeties don't lead to - and so next time - after another 3 Tory-led Westminster governments?


----------



## CMAC (Jun 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So if it's a NO this time -* in 15 years or so time do the Scottish electorate get another go?*  Who says a NO is forever.  A YES might be - but a NO?  Meanwhile to get a NO this time throw the Scottish electorate sweeties suggesting a path to DevoMax - except they'll realise DevoMax is what the sweeties don't lead to - and so next time - after another 3 Tory-led Westminster governments?
		
Click to expand...

piggin hope not, can you imagine another 15 years of this forum 'discussion'


----------



## c1973 (Jun 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Was it the last world cup when we Scots could say that we were supporting Scotland in the world Cup Finals.


I think it was  a lad called Scotland who was playing for Falkirk [or maybe St Johnstone] and T&T.
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			No thanks...........it is the way it is said and interpreted that counts..........I thought it was quite clever.

Re England support, seems to me that England, like Scotland, have quite a few of their own countrymen/women who do not support them. Does that make them bigots to, or is that too hard to work out?
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			Jim Baxter had a wee game of keepy uppy in the middle of the park and his team mates toyed with the World Champions before giving them a comprehensive drubbing.

Seems like only yesterday to me.

1966 in black and white
1967 in colour.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqhNqNtCinM

Great finish from The Lawman.
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			I started the Rangers thread and this one.
I think the Rangers post went to 5,000 + posts and scrillions of views.
The Rangers one was lightly modded as well, big cheer to the Mods for allowing two potential powder kegs from exploding.
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			I can never understand why some towns/ cities are considered Northern [Sheffield] whilst more Northern towns [Grimsby] are Midlands.

Even funnier to us Scots is when the BBC weather man giving the UK weather report says 'and in the north' whilst pointing to Liverpool.
That's nearly South when it comes to the UK.
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			Tends to support my thought that Manchester/Liverpool are nearly in the Midlands if the Oop North line is from the Humber to the Mersey.
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			So Glockasshire is in the Midlands and Naarfolk is in the South..........that does not make any sense whatsoever.
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



*Come on folks this thread is about the effect Scottish independence will or will not have on the UK.

It has been enlightening to me and I hope others please try to keep it that way.*

Click to expand...

*
*


Please do.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 10, 2014)

c1973 said:



			[/B][/B]


Please do.



Click to expand...

Yeah! well done. That must have taken up quite a bit of your [slightly sad] time.

You know I only made the plea as the Mods were disappointed the way the thread was heading

Edit ........Perhaps I should have put a comma after 'others' on my earlier post.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Yeah! well done. That must have taken up quite a bit of your [slightly sad] time.

You know I only made the plea as the Mods were disappointed the way the thread was heading

Edit ........Perhaps I should have put a comma after 'others' on my earlier post.
		
Click to expand...

Not really, couple of minutes at most. Only went back a day. 

I only responded to your (slightly sanctimonious) post to highlight the hypocritical nature (imo) of it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 10, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Not really, couple of minutes at most. Only went back a day. 

I only responded to your (slightly sanctimonious) post to highlight the hypocritical nature (imo) of it.
		
Click to expand...

Guilty as charged.


----------



## Val (Jun 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So if it's a NO this time - in 15 years or so time do the Scottish electorate get another go?  Who says a NO is forever.  A YES might be - but a NO?  Meanwhile to get a NO this time throw the Scottish electorate sweeties suggesting a path to DevoMax - except they'll realise DevoMax is what the sweeties don't lead to - and so next time - after another 3 Tory-led Westminster governments?
		
Click to expand...

It was a no in 1979 so maybe another 35 years


----------



## Dodger (Jun 10, 2014)

I will support any team but 'them'....anyone.

Call me a bigot if you wish.

Will never support them at anything,the same way as I will never support Estonia, Cyprus, Mexico and anyone else I have no tie to,oh unless they are playing England of course.:smirk:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 10, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I will support any team but 'them'....anyone.

Call me a bigot if you wish.

Will never support them at anything,the same way as I will never support Estonia, Cyprus, Mexico and anyone else I have no tie to,oh unless they are playing England of course.:smirk:
		
Click to expand...

I would never expect anyone outside England to support England - why should they ?  And it certainly isnt being a bigot - its called rivalry between two coutnries very close to each other


----------



## Rumpokid (Jun 10, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I will support any team but 'them'....anyone.

Call me a bigot if you wish.

Will never support them at anything,the same way as I will never support Estonia, Cyprus, Mexico and anyone else I have no tie to,oh unless they are playing England of course.:smirk:
		
Click to expand...

Likewise when the other lot play..Even when playing Peru, Iran,Georgia etc..


----------



## Dodger (Jun 10, 2014)

Rumpokid said:



			Likewise when the other lot play..Even when playing Peru, Iran,Georgia etc..

Click to expand...


Nobody ever supports the Welsh.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 10, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I will support any team but 'them'....anyone.

Call me a bigot if you wish.

Will never support them at anything,the same way as I will never support Estonia, Cyprus, Mexico and anyone else I have no tie to,oh unless they are playing England of course.:smirk:
		
Click to expand...

Guess you have to be a little bitter and bigoted if your national team is so rubbish that no one will have a chance to despise them again! :smirk:


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Nobody ever supports the Welsh.

Click to expand...

Well, it was a Welsh Rugby commentator that turned me into an ABE fan!

Always a dilemma for Kiwis when England play Australia - who do we want to lose most!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I will support any team but 'them'....anyone.

Call me a bigot if you wish.

Will never support them at anything,the same way as I will never support Estonia, Cyprus, Mexico and anyone else I have no tie to,oh unless they are playing England of course.:smirk:
		
Click to expand...

I don't sit there desperately urging England on and I don't jump up and down when they score - but I don't support the opposition.  I will be pleased when they win but won't be upset if they lose.  In fact if I am totally honest a bit of me does a little smile to itself when England lose - sorry - can't just help it.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 11, 2014)

JK Rowling has donated Â£1mil to the Anti independence campaign 

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jun/11/jk-rowling-donates-scotland-anti-independence-campaign


Couple of paragraphs stick out for me

*"My hesitance at embracing independence has nothing to do with lack of belief in Scotland's remarkable people or its achievements. The simple truth is that Scotland is subject to the same 21st-century pressures as the rest of the world.

"It must compete in the same global markets, defend itself from the same threats and navigate what still feels like a fragile economic recovery. The more I listen to the yes campaign, the more I worry about its minimisation and even denial of risks.

"Whenever the big issues are raised â€“ our heavy reliance on oil revenue if we become independent, what currency we'll use, whether we'll get back into the EU â€“ reasonable questions are drowned out by accusations of 'scaremongering.' Meanwhile, dramatically differing figures and predictions are being slapped in front of us by both campaigns, so that it becomes difficult to know what to believe."

She continued: "If we leave, though, there will be no going back. This separation will not be quick and clean: it will take microsurgery to disentangle three centuries of close interdependence, after which we will have to deal with three bitter neighbours.*


----------



## c1973 (Jun 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			JK Rowling has donated Â£1mil to the Anti independence campaign 

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jun/11/jk-rowling-donates-scotland-anti-independence-campaign


Couple of paragraphs stick out for me

*"My hesitance at embracing independence has nothing to do with lack of belief in Scotland's remarkable people or its achievements. The simple truth is that Scotland is subject to the same 21st-century pressures as the rest of the world.

"It must compete in the same global markets, defend itself from the same threats and navigate what still feels like a fragile economic recovery. The more I listen to the yes campaign, the more I worry about its minimisation and even denial of risks.

"Whenever the big issues are raised â€“ our heavy reliance on oil revenue if we become independent, what currency we'll use, whether we'll get back into the EU â€“ reasonable questions are drowned out by accusations of 'scaremongering.' Meanwhile, dramatically differing figures and predictions are being slapped in front of us by both campaigns, so that it becomes difficult to know what to believe."

She continued: "If we leave, though, there will be no going back. This separation will not be quick and clean: it will take microsurgery to disentangle three centuries of close interdependence, after which we will have to deal with three bitter neighbours.*

Click to expand...


Very good points that she raises, particularly about the yes campaigns automatic response of 'scaremongering' when difficult questions are asked and the truth that it will be a protracted, bitter seperation. 

I may be wrong, but I can see a lot of I'll feeling and resentment in Scotland in the future, regardless of which way the vote goes.


----------



## Val (Jun 11, 2014)

Will there be a Harry Potter boycott I wonder.


----------



## IanG (Jun 11, 2014)

It's worth reading all of JK's Blog piece 

http://www.jkrowling.com/en_GB/#/news-events

Not only is it coherent, but  among all the verbiage being spouted over this issue it reminds us how easy it is to follow something when it is well well written!


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			JK Rowling has donated Â£1mil to the Anti independence campaign
		
Click to expand...


Cue large amounts of 'hate mail' heading her way...


----------



## Alan (Jun 11, 2014)

She must have wrote that during her many lunches with Samantha Cameron, not a secret her and jK are big buddies. They stay regularly in Aberfeldy at JK's house. Another David Cameron "friend"rolled out to bang the drum.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 11, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Cue large amounts of 'hate mail' heading her way...
		
Click to expand...

Or maybe a coherent polite reply...

http://nationalcollective.com/2014/06/11/an-open-letter-to-j-k-rowling/


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 11, 2014)

Alan said:



			She must have wrote that during her many lunches with Samantha Cameron, not a secret her and jK are big buddies. They stay regularly in Aberfeldy at JK's house. Another David Cameron "friend"rolled out to bang the drum.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up, it's all about friendship and nothing to do with her belief. Got it :clap:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 11, 2014)

I have always thought that JK would make an excellent Scottish President.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 11, 2014)

Alan said:



			She must have wrote that during her many lunches with Samantha Cameron, not a secret her and jK are big buddies. They stay regularly in Aberfeldy at JK's house. Another David Cameron "friend"rolled out to bang the drum.
		
Click to expand...


But what about the content and what she actually wrote ? Are they valid observations ?


----------



## IanG (Jun 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Or maybe a coherent polite reply...

http://nationalcollective.com/2014/06/11/an-open-letter-to-j-k-rowling/

Click to expand...

Yes, thanks for that. Taken together they convey the choice we're being asked to make  and our differing responses to that choice rather well.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			But what about the content and what she actually wrote ? Are they valid observations ?
		
Click to expand...

Very much so.
I think she may have turned a few heads.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 11, 2014)

Alan said:



			She must have wrote that during her many lunches with Samantha Cameron, not a secret her and jK are big buddies. They stay regularly in Aberfeldy at JK's house. Another David Cameron "friend"rolled out to bang the drum.
		
Click to expand...

Hilarious, she's a long time labour supporter! Even her blog post (see IanG's link above) criticises the current westminster government.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 11, 2014)

IanG said:



			Yes, thanks for that. Taken together they convey the choice we're being asked to make  and our differing responses to that choice rather well.
		
Click to expand...

I would agree with that as I tend to agree with both statements.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Hilarious, she's a long time labour supporter! Even her blog post (see IanG's link above criticises the current westminster government)
		
Click to expand...

This is also my thoughts.Big mates with captain Darling.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 11, 2014)

This is a line from an 18 year old girl when they launched the Better Together Campaign

â€œMy mum is English, my dad is Scottish, my brother grew up in London. But we are a family and cannot and will not be divided. That's why I'm saying no thanks to separation."

Plus this is the rest of the article 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ing-compares-Alex-Salmond-to-Kim-Jong-il.html


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			This is a line from an 18 year old girl when they launched the Better Together Campaign

â€œMy mum is English, my dad is Scottish, my brother grew up in London. But we are a family and cannot and will not be divided. That's why I'm saying no thanks to separation."
		
Click to expand...

Touching - but not quite sure how it relates to independence - as haven't seen either YES or BT suggesting members of families would have to choose between living in Scotland or rUK in the event of a YES


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			This is a line from an 18 year old girl when they launched the Better Together Campaign

â€œMy mum is English, my dad is Scottish, my brother grew up in London. But we are a family and cannot and will not be divided. That's why I'm saying no thanks to separation."

Plus this is the rest of the article 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ing-compares-Alex-Salmond-to-Kim-Jong-il.html

Click to expand...


I could say I'm Scottish, my mum was Irish, my dad and sister are English and we'll all be voting yes...and the Darling NS interview agreed the nationalist movement in Scotland resembled 'blood and soil' nationalism-a direct comparison to Nazi Germany...they tried to deny it and laid the blame at the editing of the interview, only for the actual tape to confirm he did agree with that sentiment.

So whilst everyone jumps on their high horses about cyber nats and death eaters, take a look at the other lot and their crass tactics...kids with cancer not being allowed into GOS hospital another recent belter.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 11, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Thanks for clearing that up, it's all about friendship and nothing to do with her belief. Got it :clap:
		
Click to expand...

Well one is the wife of a politician (PM even) and previously a 'creative Director'. The other is the writer of fantasy fiction.

Are you really surprised that some folk don't believe a word of what they say?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I could say I'm Scottish, my mum was Irish, my dad and sister are English and we'll all be voting yes...and the Darling NS interview agreed the nationalist movement in Scotland resembled 'blood and soil' nationalism-a direct comparison to Nazi Germany...they tried to deny it and laid the blame at the editing of the interview, only for the actual tape to confirm he did agree with that sentiment.

So whilst everyone jumps on their high horses about cyber nats and death eaters, take a look at the other lot and their crass tactics...*kids with cancer not being allowed into GOS hospital another recent belter*.
		
Click to expand...

There has been lots of tit for tat insults etc all throughout so far 

What this ? Can you enlighten me more on that story ?


----------



## Val (Jun 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Touching - but not quite sure how it relates to independence - as haven't seen either YES or BT suggesting members of families would have to choose between living in Scotland or rUK in the event of a YES
		
Click to expand...

It's another example of what the division of the UK is, a split of a family. No one is suggesting actual families will be split up.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			There has been lots of tit for tat insults etc all throughout so far 

What this ? Can you enlighten me more on that story ?
		
Click to expand...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...dependence-group-withdraws-cinema-advert.html


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...dependence-group-withdraws-cinema-advert.html

Click to expand...

So GOS asked for the advert to be removed because they didn't endorse it 

And would admissions into hospitals outside not change then if you became independent ? 

So a child hasn't been stopped as such but things will possibly change if you do become independent surely ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So GOS asked for the advert to be removed because they didn't endorse it 

And would admissions into hospitals outside not change then if you became independent ? 

So a child hasn't been stopped as such but things will possibly change if you do become independent surely ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes

No

No


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Yes

No

No
		
Click to expand...

Why won't they change then ? Won't your admissions into an NHS hospital be the same as another foreign national ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why won't they change then ? Won't your admissions into an NHS hospital be the same as another foreign national ?
		
Click to expand...

I'm of the belief that Scotland and rUK will have agreements in place to supercede even the reciprocal health agreements already in place for all EU member states (fill your boots), even more so than the reciprocal health agreements we currently have with our Antipodean cousins.

Just now our NHS is a totally different concept to England/Wales version but they seem to work well side by side, I can't see that ending.

I'm constantly bemused by unionists telling us we can't afford to go it alone ( and therefore we're subsidised by England) but are so keen to keep us part of the union.I just don't get that.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm of the belief that Scotland and rUK will have agreements in place to supercede even the reciprocal health agreements already in place for all EU member states (fill your boots), even more so than the reciprocal health agreements we currently have with our Antipodean cousins.

Just now our NHS is a totally different concept to England/Wales version but they seem to work well side by side, I can't see that ending.

I'm constantly bemused by unionists telling us we can't afford to go it alone ( and therefore we're subsidised by England) but are so keen to keep us part of the union.I just don't get that.
		
Click to expand...

So you want to go alone but still have "agreements in place" to help you out ? You can afford it but you want agreements 

Our NHS works well with yours because we fall under the same nation currently - you go independent then you "go alone" and you will have the same admission rights as any other EU member ( when you get into the EU ). 

You want to go alone and you want independence - are you really going alone when you will want "agreements" in place 

As JK Rowling has said - the dangers out there are no different for an Independent Scotland as they are for other countries so I'm not sure how you can be better alone.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So you want to go alone but still have "agreements in place" to help you out ? You can afford it but you want agreements 

Our NHS works well with yours because we fall under the same nation currently - you go independent then you "go alone" and you will have the same admission rights as any other EU member ( when you get into the EU ). 

You want to go alone and you want independence - are you really going alone when you will want "agreements" in place 

As JK Rowling has said - the dangers out there are no different for an Independent Scotland as they are for other countries so I'm not sure how you can be better alone.
		
Click to expand...

I don't want to go it alone, I want the ability to be held responsible for the choices my country makes, I want to be a citizen of a responsible country with a cordial and friendly partnership with ruk.NHS Scotland is completely seperate from NHS in England, seperate countries run them and yet they seem to work well together.

Some folk who want the union preserved will take the hump and refuse to have anything to do with Scotland if we vote yes.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It's another example of what the division of the UK is, a split of a family. No one is suggesting actual families will be split up.
		
Click to expand...

Except the young lady was saying that her family would be divided if Scotland vote YES.  Poppycock,  If Scotland votes YES I am not going to be parted in any way from from my mum, brother, sister, aunts, uncles, 14 first cousins etc who all live in Scotland.  So no divisions whatsoever unless you manufacture them in your own head,


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 11, 2014)

Has SILH finally decided to take a punt? :rofl:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...15/Man-bets-400000-on-Scotland-saying-no.html


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Except the young lady was saying that her family would be divided if Scotland vote YES.  Poppycock,  If Scotland votes YES I am not going to be parted in any way from from my mum, brother, sister, aunts, uncles, 14 first cousins etc who all live in Scotland.  So no divisions whatsoever unless you manufacture them in your own head,
		
Click to expand...

No, you're not. But.... you'll be British and they won't. Maybe that doesn't make a whole lot of difference but it goes to our identity and some of us will feel affected.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I don't want to go it alone, I want the ability to be held responsible for the choices my country makes, I want to be a citizen of a responsible country with a cordial and friendly partnership with ruk.NHS Scotland is completely seperate from NHS in England, seperate countries run them and yet they seem to work well together.

Some folk who want the union preserved will take the hump and refuse to have anything to do with Scotland if we vote yes.
		
Click to expand...

So you want nations to be United together and working together ? Isn't that the UK anyway ? 

Sorry but you are voting to go it alone - to be independent from the rest of the countries in the UK - you can't have the cake and have all the good bits. Go independent and go alone - you keep saying you can afford to go alone - well then go alone - don't pick and choose what partnerships will be good for you and which ones won't be. 

If Scotland want to be independent then be independent and they countries you decided to leave will make theirs decisions for the good of them not of an independent Scotland.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Except the young lady was saying that her family would be divided if Scotland vote YES.  Poppycock,  If Scotland votes YES I am not going to be parted in any way from from my mum, brother, sister, aunts, uncles, 14 first cousins etc who all live in Scotland.  So no divisions whatsoever unless you manufacture them in your own head,
		
Click to expand...

No, but you might need a passport to visit them.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			No, you're not. But.... you'll be British and they won't. Maybe that doesn't make a whole lot of difference but it goes to our identity and some of us will feel affected.
		
Click to expand...

Nope - first and foremost I'll still and will always be Scottish.  What it says on my passport is what it says in my passport.  Wouldn't divide me from my family any more than living in Surrey does.  Of my wider family out to and including my aunts, uncles and 14 first cousins (and their kids etc) only one other lives outside of Scotland - and she was born here.  So I am 'the one who left Scotland to live in England' 

So the young ladies 'divided' family - doesn't have to be unless that's what she wants.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 11, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Has SILH finally decided to take a punt? :rofl:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...15/Man-bets-400000-on-Scotland-saying-no.html

Click to expand...

Nah! Â£400,000?  I'd have to sell an acre of my land to be able to afford to do that


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Nope - first and foremost I'll still and will always be Scottish.  What it says on my passport is what it says in my passport.  Wouldn't divide me from my family any more than living in Surrey does.  Of my wider family out to and including my aunts, uncles and 14 first cousins (and their kids etc) only one other lives outside of Scotland - and she was born here.  So I am 'the one who left Scotland to live in England' 

So the young ladies 'divided' family - doesn't have to be unless that's what she wants.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think she "wants" to be divided but, as I said, this about our individual identity. You feel Scottish and that won't change great, for you. Some of us feel British but wouldn't be any longer. I don't think you should denigrate anyone concerned about that  loss just because it doesn't bother you. (And, in fact, doesn't even affect you.)


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 11, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Has SILH finally decided to take a punt? :rofl:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...15/Man-bets-400000-on-Scotland-saying-no.html

Click to expand...

Probably FredBet laying off.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I don't think she "wants" to be divided but, as I said, this about our individual identity. You feel Scottish and that won't change great, for you. Some of us feel British but wouldn't be any longer. I don't think you should denigrate anyone concerned about that  loss just because it doesn't bother you. (And, in fact, doesn't even affect you.)
		
Click to expand...

Is she not though implying the family division she fears is something she can do nothing about.  She might feel that way but to be honest it's no different from what my dad said to me when I told my folks that I was going to live and work in England   It might well be her reason for voting NO but I'm not sure how real the emotion behind it actually is.  Anyway - each to his and her own.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Is she not though implying the family division she fears is something she can do nothing about.  She might feel that way but to be honest it's no different from what my dad said to me when I told my folks that I was going to live and work in England   It might well be her reason for voting NO but I'm not sure how real the emotion behind it actually is.  Anyway - each to his and her own.
		
Click to expand...

She is an 18 year old girl who would like her family to stay under the same umbrella - She doesn't believe that will happen if their is a yes vote - it's her emotions and her fears and they are just being dismissed. Everything just gets dismissed.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			She is an 18 year old girl who would like her family to stay under the same umbrella - She doesn't believe that will happen if their is a yes vote - it's her emotions and her fears and they are just being dismissed. Everything just gets dismissed.
		
Click to expand...

Bit of a non story really.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Bit of a non story really.
		
Click to expand...


Is it ? Not to the girl in question.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Is it ? Not to the girl in question.
		
Click to expand...

The Scots are well known for their traveling.
I think there are four times as many first generation Scots in the world than those who live in Scotland.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The Scots are well known for their traveling.
I think there are four times as many first generation Scots in the world than those who live in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

That still doesn't make the young girls point any less relevant or a non story


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The Scots are well known for their traveling.
I think there are four times as many first generation Scots in the world than those who live in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

So do 80% of first generation Scots think they have a better chance in life away from Scotland?


----------



## Iaing (Jun 11, 2014)

More likely the neighbours that they're trying to get away from.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 11, 2014)

Another bad day in the office http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...ack-on-mother-who-spoke-up-for-the-Union.html


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Nah! Â£400,000?  I'd have to sell an acre of my land to be able to afford to do that 

Click to expand...

Half an acre could do it, with some to spare, in your neck of the world!


----------



## Val (Jun 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Except the young lady was saying that her family would be divided if Scotland vote YES.  Poppycock,  If Scotland votes YES I am not going to be parted in any way from from my mum, brother, sister, aunts, uncles, 14 first cousins etc who all live in Scotland.  So no divisions whatsoever unless you manufacture them in your own head,
		
Click to expand...

I think you are looking to far into it.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 12, 2014)

Iaing said:



			More likely the neighbours that they're trying to get away from.
		
Click to expand...

Thats a bit of a slur on fellow Scots!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 12, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			So do 80% of first generation Scots think they have a better chance in life away from Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

I think it is a better chance of earning a decent wage rather than a better life.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 12, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Another bad day in the office http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...ack-on-mother-who-spoke-up-for-the-Union.html

Click to expand...

And just for balance it was cancelled out by the Darling boy's Third Reich 'blood and soil' reference.

I shall leave it to you to understand which one is more offensive.


----------



## Hobbit (Jun 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			And just for balance it was cancelled out by the Darling boy's Third Reich 'blood and soil' reference.

I shall leave it to you to understand which one is more offensive.
		
Click to expand...

Total Rubbish Doon, and typical of the spin that Nationalists are putting out. It was the New Statesman's journalist who used that term, and Alaister Darling's reply to him had a far wider definition. Alex Salmond picked the term used by the journo and part of Darling's response, and spun it by linking it to Nazi-ism.

Although I didn't like Salmond, I admired his political ability. But with the depths the SNP have plumbed in recent weeks I feel nothing but distaste for him and the way the campaign has been run. What could have been a noble proposition for independence and the future of Scotland has been dirtied by the base level the SNP have stooped to in recent weeks.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			And just for balance it was cancelled out by the Darling boy's Third Reich 'blood and soil' reference.

I shall leave it to you to understand which one is more offensive.
		
Click to expand...

Thats were you always fail.  Both are offensive and anyone that uses these tactics should be hounded from office but unfortunatly you tend at times to be a tad blinkered and take sides when it comes to the who's negative/offensive.
A fault that we can all fall into at times but the Yes side seem to do it with venom.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 12, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Total Rubbish Doon, and typical of the spin that Nationalists are putting out. It was the New Statesman's journalist who used that term, and Alaister Darling's reply to him had a far wider definition. Alex Salmond picked the term used by the journo and part of Darling's response, and spun it by linking it to Nazi-ism.

Although I didn't like Salmond, I admired his political ability. But with the depths the SNP have plumbed in recent weeks I feel nothing but distaste for him and the way the campaign has been run. What could have been a noble proposition for independence and the future of Scotland has been dirtied by the base level the SNP have stooped to in recent weeks.
		
Click to expand...

http://newsnetscotland.com/index.ph...ing-casts-doubt-on-blood-and-soil-nationalism

Ye at heart!!


----------



## Hobbit (Jun 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://newsnetscotland.com/index.ph...ing-casts-doubt-on-blood-and-soil-nationalism

Ye at heart!!
		
Click to expand...

I suggest you get the actual text of what was said by both parties in the original interview, and read it in context. The within quotes was most definitely not said by Darling. That's not even in the version that Alex Salmond misquoted. But hey, if it suits your blinkered belief to take onboard the spun version, knock yourself out.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think it is a better chance of earning a decent wage rather than a better life.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree.  I may earn more than I would in Scotland but compared with living in Surrey (which might sound all nice and dandy) I get the feeling that living in Scotland would provide me with a better quality of life - though I think the same about living in North Derbyshire or South Yorkshire (where we may move in the coming few years).  As much as SW Surrey is a nice area in which to live I don't really have as good a quality of living as I might - the fact that the cost of living is astronomical (only in fact a minor dose of hyperbole there) doesn't help, as nor does the traffic.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 12, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			I suggest you get the actual text of what was said by both parties in the original interview, and read it in context. The within quotes was most definitely not said by Darling. That's not even in the version that Alex Salmond misquoted. But hey, if it suits your blinkered belief to take onboard the spun version, knock yourself out.
		
Click to expand...

He agreed with the blood and soil bit, that can't be denied.

Anyway, yesterdays news and todays chippie wrappers.

Interesting to see that DR poll...IF Cameron was a cert to win next year (and I think he is) YES jumps massively into the lead.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Interesting to see that DR poll...IF Cameron was a cert to win next year (and I think he is) YES jumps massively into the lead.
		
Click to expand...

Which is massively depressing. Everyone's vote is theirs to use as they see fit but it's a sad reflection if anyone uses such a short term view as part of their decision. It's as bad as the "how would you vote if you were Â£500 better off" question.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 12, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Which is massively depressing. Everyone's vote is theirs to use as they see fit but it's a sad reflection if anyone uses such a short term view as part of their decision. It's as bad as the "how would you vote if you were Â£500 better off" question.
		
Click to expand...


Maybe,maybe not.The vast majority of folk in Scotland cannot see any kind of common ground with the likes of Cameron/Osbourne...they've lived a life lightyears away from that of your normal Scot.At least Ruth Davidson is a 'normal' person, same applies to Salmond and Lamont.The political elite in Westminster ( front benches) are privately schooled professional politicians with no understanding of life in Scotland.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Maybe,maybe not.The vast majority of folk in Scotland cannot see any kind of common ground with the likes of Cameron/Osbourne...they've lived a life lightyears away from that of your normal Scot.At least Ruth Davidson is a 'normal' person, same applies to Salmond and Lamont.The political elite in Westminster ( front benches) are privately schooled professional politicians with no understanding of life in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Don't disagree just think it's a lousy reason to vote for independence.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The political elite in Westminster ( front benches) are privately schooled professional politicians with no understanding of life in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...


I'd just like to point out, if I may, they have no comprehension of 'life' in general NOT just for in Scotland...


----------



## Val (Jun 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Maybe,maybe not.The vast majority of folk in Scotland cannot see any kind of common ground with the likes of Cameron/Osbourne...they've lived a life lightyears away from that of your normal Scot.At least Ruth Davidson is a 'normal' person, same applies to Salmond and Lamont.The political elite in Westminster ( front benches) are privately schooled professional politicians with no understanding of life in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Unlike the face of the yes camp who know day to day living in Scotland 

The only difference is they are Scottish, do you think Alex Salmond knows what days his bins go out and what goes in the blue/green/black bin?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 12, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Don't disagree just think it's a lousy reason to vote for independence.
		
Click to expand...

I agree it's lousy but isn't it just a symptom of an underlying malaise that needs addressing.  Independence may be a sledgehammer but with DevoMax removed as a referendum option, and apparent Westminster reticence to support the 'additional powers for Holyrood' being suggested by BT, some folks might ask what else is there to cure the malaise.  

There does appear to be a huge disconnect between the Scottish electorate and Westminster - especially the Tories - and the prospect of one, two or three more Tory-led Westminster governments just isn't a very attractive proposition.  

However for the Scottish electorate to be weighing up Tory Westminster Governments against an Indep Scotland is to me a bit like comparing apples and oranges - but that is one comparison that's being made.  And if you are hungry and really don't like oranges - you are more likely to eat the apple - whether you like them or not.  And you might never find the banana that you really crave.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 12, 2014)

Long term I think the SE of England will be moving to the right, with a sort of UKIP/Tory coalition.
The majority of the UK's population live in the SE of England so they will always control the UK politics.

Scottish folk would, I believe, wish to move a tad to the left and present a more fair and equal society. One that does not have food banks, one where the young generation can afford to buy their own home, and one were we pay a living wage instead of the MINIMUM wage.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Long term I think the SE of England will be moving to the right...
		
Click to expand...


Not really the case at recent Euro/council elections where London 'moved' to the left and voted Labour...


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 12, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Unlike the face of the yes camp who know day to day living in Scotland 

The only difference is they are Scottish, do you think Alex Salmond knows what days his bins go out and what goes in the blue/green/black bin?
		
Click to expand...

I think Salmond/Davidson/Lamont know a hell of alot more about 'normal' life than Milliband/Cameron/Osbourne.


----------



## Val (Jun 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I think Salmond/Davidson/Lamont know a hell of alot more about 'normal' life than Milliband/Cameron/Osbourne.
		
Click to expand...

I don't disagree merely pointing out they are detached from it also.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 12, 2014)

Heads Up.

Just watched Janet Street-Porter's.... Scotland 2014 programme called 'Janet's Scotland'.
Very good watch and I would say compulsive viewing for any rUK resident and all who post on hear.
It probably is the nearest thing to the reality of how the Scottish people think about the process and the difficult decisions they have to make.

The Borders Tweed producer summed it up perfectly when he said it was 'Threats v Bluster and I don't like either of them'
You will have to find it on iplayer as it went out a couple of days ago.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Heads Up.

Just watched Janet Street-Porter's.... Scotland 2014 programme called 'Janet's Scotland'.
Very good watch and I would say compulsive viewing for any rUK resident and all who post on hear.
It probably is the nearest thing to the reality of how the Scottish people think about the process and the difficult decisions they have to make.

The Borders Tweed producer summed it up perfectly when he said it was 'Threats v Bluster and I don't like either of them'
You will have to find it on iplayer as it went out a couple of days ago.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27764295

Hope the 'trendies' people can link it from this.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 24, 2014)

Enjoyed this read from fellow Hibernian foot soldier and Leither Irvine Welsh

http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/i...-hope-to-the-left-across-britain-9559111.html


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Enjoyed this read from fellow Hibernian foot soldier and Leither Irvine Welsh

http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/i...-hope-to-the-left-across-britain-9559111.html

Click to expand...

Ach, I'm not a fan but he was going well and made some decent points. Right up until he nailed his colours to the mast and declared the referendum as hope vs fear. Tired, lazy rhetoric... designed to stifle the debate he claims to be so proud of by belittling those of us who are against independence.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 24, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Ach, I'm not a fan but he was going well and made some decent points. Right up until he nailed his colours to the mast and declared the referendum as hope vs fear. Tired, lazy rhetoric... designed to stifle the debate he claims to be so proud of by belittling those of us who are against independence.
		
Click to expand...

I've yet to see much + for No (thanks) except adding the word thanks to their badges.Whenever we see Salmond/Sturgeon on the TV it's the land of milk and honey, with Darling/Carmichael is doom and gloom for iScotland.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've yet to see much + for No (thanks) except adding the word thanks to their badges.Whenever we see Salmond/Sturgeon on the TV it's the land of milk and honey, with Darling/Carmichael is doom and gloom for iScotland.
		
Click to expand...

The whole debate has been framed in that way, and it's a real shame. I'm voting "No" and I made my mind up for social/cultural/philosophical rather than economic reasons. Fear doesn't come into it. I'd like to see Better Together exploring some of those issues but, I guess, they feel the need to tackle the "streets paved with gold" claims head on. Plus, in fairness, they're somewhat more "ethereal"....... people coming together rather than pushing apart etc etc....

Lots of it comes down to that stupid poll early on that suggested just Â£500 better off either way would sway most voters.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 24, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I made my mind up for social/cultural/philosophical rather than economic reasons.
		
Click to expand...

Would you mind expanding on this? Appreciate you might not want to, but I'm honestly keen to hear what you mean by this from a unionist point of view.I'm happy to give my version from a nationalist point of view if you like?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 24, 2014)

Like many I got my 'better together' leaflet through the door this week.

It did not send me jumping oot of my seat waving a Union Jack.

On one hand they are telling us that we receive per head 10% more money than rUK then they say that we should stick with the big guys who represent 31 million UK taxpayers.

Well Scotland has a higher percentage of folk in work paying tax than rUK so I'm not sure that is a winner.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Would you mind expanding on this? Appreciate you might not want to, but I'm honestly keen to hear what you mean by this from a unionist point of view.I'm happy to give my version from a nationalist point of view if you like?
		
Click to expand...

I'll give it a bash later on when I've got a bit more time to think how to express it. The one time I got cornered by a "Yes" campaigner and tried to explain my point of view he looked at me like I was mad.


----------



## JamPal (Jun 24, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I'll give it a bash later on when I've got a bit more time to think how to express it. The one time I got cornered by a "Yes" campaigner and tried to explain my point of view he looked at me like I was mad. 

Click to expand...

Perhaps you are. 

I am also a NO, but live in England so have no say in the future of the UK. Which seems a shame, as I feel it will effect England and Wales too. That said, I do understand that this is about Scotland and for Scotland and so the Scots must decide. 

I would urge the independence voters to ignore much of the poor rhetoric coming from Westminster, it does the UK campaign no favours. The best reason to stay together is quite simple, strength in numbers. There are things all of us dislike about Westminster, but to just leave would be to throw the baby out with the bath water. I wish I could vote as I want you to stay, we are better together. the UK needs Scotland and Scotland is stronger standing beside the English and Welsh, rather than against us. And if you don't think voting yes is going against England and Wales, you need to stop and think how it will feel to us.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 24, 2014)

culture: clearly Scotland and England share a large chunk of their cultures, with both contributing to the various scenes that make up what can probably be put under the umbrella of 'Britishness', something that can never change ( I mean Britain will never cease, The UK just might) Whether it's the pop music scene, art, dance or our terrific shared history of literature, a yes vote won't change that for the worse, why would it?But within all of the things I've mentioned, there are distinct Scottish voices that make our own wee slice of 'Britishness' very Scottish,whether thats the afore mentioned Irvine Welsh or Hugh Mcilvanney or Arthur Conan Doyle or Franz Ferdinand,The Proclaimers or The Sensational Alex Harvey, or Billy Connolly or Frankie Boyle or Jerry Sadowitz...there is a distinct Scottish popular culture that I genuinely believe is unique and seperate to that of England.Some of the above probably support(ed) the union, but it can't be avoided their Scottishness.To our shame Scotland also has a culture of domestic violence,alcoholism,lung cancer and low life expectancy.There are social issues in Scotland that need addressed, possibly moreso than anywhere else in the UK currently.The standard one of adult men living longer in The Gazza Strip than is Possil highlights this.But we also have a culture of innovation,invention and armed service...in some shameful parts of our shared cultural history but also in life affirming moments of wonder I could never understand and hope never to see.Like other parts of The UK, Scotland has a proud history of manual work, ,of ship building,farming and finance.

So I agree there have been many terrific,historical things achieved by the UK, but to my eye, most of the good has been undone in the past 30 years by a new cultural revolution.A cultural revolution seeded in Westminster where career politicians with zero knowledge of real life having their palms greased by corporations to allow tax evasion, of boom and bust economies then loading blame onto sections of society unable to defend themselves, whether they're foreign,disabled,unemployed or whatever.A culture has been created that I'm sure most folk on here disagree with,a culture we'd all like to change.But the sad fact is it's not possible to change the culture of Westminster/career politicians/The city of London and the greed.it's too deeply ingrained now.The UK is pretty much done.But I do think there is a chance for Scotlands culture to be reinvigorated.We've seen in the past year an incredible revival in participation in the political scene, from both sides.This is a pointer to the future what ever way we vote I think, but I also think it shows there is a hunger for the culture of Scotland to find itself as a unique voice, not just part of UK popular culture.It's also the chance for England to look on and say, aye, gimme a bit of that.

I was staying in a house in Boat of Garten last week and saw this poster in the toilet...tongue in cheek, but quite nice.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 24, 2014)

JamPal said:



			I would urge the independence voters to ignore much of the poor rhetoric coming from Westminster, it does the UK campaign no favours. The best reason to stay together is quite simple, strength in numbers.
		
Click to expand...

I read something recently showing the top 15 performing economies...out of that 15, I think 12 had populations on par with Scotland.Strength in numbers is a myth, being an agile diverse economy is far superior...think Singapore/Finland/Iceland...I try and find the atricle.


----------



## JamPal (Jun 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I read something recently showing the top 15 performing economies...out of that 15, I think 12 had populations on par with Scotland.Strength in numbers is a myth, being an agile diverse economy is far superior...think Singapore/Finland/Iceland...I try and find the atricle.
		
Click to expand...

Strength in numbers wasn't a myth when the UK bailed out Bank of Scotland. but ok, perhaps overall that argument doesn't always stand up. 

It's the desire to isolate that I find sad. The rest of the world is struggling to bring ourselves closer to each other. it all seems such a retrograde step.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 24, 2014)

JamPal said:



			Strength in numbers wasn't a myth when the UK bailed out Bank of Scotland. but ok, perhaps overall that argument doesn't always stand up. 

It's the desire to isolate that I find sad. The rest of the world is struggling to bring ourselves closer to each other. it all seems such a retrograde step.
		
Click to expand...

Do you mean RBS? bank bail outs rely on the country in question taking the share of bad debt accumulated in their country...the city of london was responsible for the majority of that debt.Google fortis dexia for a better explanation.

And we don't want to isolate, we want to be good international partners, just on our own terms and not those thrust upon us by govts we don't elect.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Do you mean RBS? bank bail outs rely on the country in question taking the share of bad debt accumulated in their country...the city of london was responsible for the majority of that debt.Google fortis dexia for a better explanation.

And *we* don't want to isolate, *we* want to be good international partners, just on our own terms and not those thrust upon us by govts *we* don't elect.
		
Click to expand...

And here is a great example of one of the most annoying things in this debate. Who is this WE that you speak of?  You do not speak for all Scots, in fact going by polls it's doubtful you speak for anything approaching the majority. 

Not so much a dig at yourself btw (well, just a little bit perhaps) but more at the yes campaign spokespersons in general who are the worst culprits of the whole 'we' speak for everyone brigade. They don't and they never have! 

It infraction bugs me no end when I hear some politician, living high on the hog, coming out with 'the people of Scotland want/don't need/don't believe/see through that' etc etbloodycetra patter. You don't speak for us all, you never have and you never infraction will!!


Rant over. Apologies.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 24, 2014)

c1973 said:



			And here is a great example of one of the most annoying things in this debate. Who is this WE that you speak of?  You do not speak for all Scots, in fact going by polls it's doubtful you speak for anything approaching the majority. 

Not so much a dig at yourself btw (well, just a little bit perhaps) but more at the yes campaign spokespersons in general who are the worst culprits of the whole 'we' speak for everyone brigade. They don't and they never have! 

It infraction bugs me no end when I hear some politician, living high on the hog, coming out with 'the people of Scotland want/don't need/don't believe/see through that' etc etbloodycetra patter. You don't speak for us all, you never have and you never infraction will!!


Rant over. Apologies. 

Click to expand...

Point me in the direction where I've ever claimed to speak for all Scots please.I thought it was pretty obvious my point of view is one of speaking from those seeking a yes victory in September.

As for polls, I never ever pay any heed as they're skewed.The ones prior to the last Scottish elections are a case in point.

rant on btw, I find it entertaining.


----------



## Foxholer (Jun 24, 2014)

c1973 said:



			And here is a great example of one of the most annoying things in this debate. Who is this WE that you speak of?  You do not speak for all Scots, in fact going by polls it's doubtful you speak for anything approaching the majority. 

Not so much a dig at yourself btw (well, just a little bit perhaps) but more at the yes campaign spokespersons in general who are the worst culprits of the whole 'we' speak for everyone brigade. They don't and they never have! 

It infraction bugs me no end when I hear some politician, living high on the hog, coming out with 'the people of Scotland want/don't need/don't believe/see through that' etc etbloodycetra patter. You don't speak for us all, you never have and you never infraction will!!


Rant over. Apologies. 

Click to expand...

I don't think you ever need to apologise for abusing politicians for their arrogant approach to the righteous nature of their own views - or at least voices!

It's part of the nature of the 'beast'!

They are, after all, simply salesmen/women (if that's not too much of a slight on proper Salesmen/Women) with, generally, a pretty poor product to sell - whichever party/side! So they have to give the impression that their view is the view of the majority, which it normally isn't, in the hope that the gullible will buy into the 'if so many others think that way, then it must be right' myth!


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jun 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Do you mean RBS? bank bail outs rely on the country in question taking the share of bad debt accumulated in their country...the city of london was responsible for the majority of that debt.Google fortis dexia for a better explanation.

And we don't want to isolate, we want to be good international partners, just on our own terms and not those thrust upon us by govts we don't elect.
		
Click to expand...

"We don't elect".

do you not? There was me thinking Scotland could vote...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 24, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			"We don't elect".

do you not? There was me thinking Scotland could vote...
		
Click to expand...

There is only ONE Tory MP in Scotland so to say 'we don't elect' is correct.


----------



## NWJocko (Jun 24, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			There is only ONE Tory MP in Scotland so to say 'we don't elect' is correct.
		
Click to expand...

After some good posts on here today from adidassler and FD you come back with you're usual tosh.

The electorate as a whole elects government so you are not correct, unless Scotland are already discounted from the UK electorate? There are huge areas of England and Wales that have never, and will never, be Tory.

How did you feel in the New Labour years? That you had elected?


----------



## Val (Jun 24, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			There is only ONE Tory MP in Scotland so to say 'we don't elect' is correct.
		
Click to expand...

That's what a democracy is, I didn't vote SNP but I'm stuck with them in the Scottish Parliament.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 24, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			After some good posts on here today from adidassler and FD you come back with you're usual tosh.

The electorate as a whole elects government so you are not correct, unless Scotland are already discounted from the UK electorate? There are huge areas of England and Wales that have never, and will never, be Tory.

How did you feel in the New Labour years? That you had elected?
		
Click to expand...

Here Here. Good point!

This rubbish saying we have a government we didnt elect is twisting facts.  I had a labour Government I didnt elect for around 13 years but never made such a stupid comment as D F T made.   You get the government you deserve.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 24, 2014)

I'll never get the govt I vote for because I vote Green.That's my choice.

But there is a grain of truth in the opinion that Scotlands voting pattern makes no difference to who runs Westminster,to the extent that whenever Labour win a GE, the Scottish vote is a bonus, not a decider and when the conservatives win, especially since the 80's, they're not very well supported .

But maybe thats the fault of first past the post instead of PR.

The fact is Scotland doesn't vote Conservative..neither does North England, but I'm afraid North England don't have the option of independence.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'll never get the govt I vote for because I vote Green.That's my choice.

But there is a grain of truth in the opinion that Scotlands voting pattern makes no difference to who runs Westminster,to the extent that whenever Labour win a GE, the Scottish vote is a bonus, not a decider and when the conservatives win, especially since the 80's, they're not very well supported .

But maybe thats the fault of first past the post instead of PR.

The fact is Scotland doesn't vote Conservative..neither does North England, but I'm afraid North England don't have the option of independence.
		
Click to expand...

Many people vote conservative in the North of England.   The Labour vote in Scotland is very important to returning a Labour Government as without them the Conservatives would be in a much stronger position.

Still confuses me as to why anyone would want a Labour Government after the mess they leave behind every time they are in power!


----------



## NWJocko (Jun 24, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'll never get the govt I vote for because I vote Green.That's my choice.

But there is a grain of truth in the opinion that Scotlands voting pattern makes no difference to who runs Westminster,to the extent that whenever Labour win a GE, the Scottish vote is a bonus, not a decider and when the conservatives win, especially since the 80's, they're not very well supported .

But maybe thats the fault of first past the post instead of PR.

The fact is Scotland doesn't vote Conservative..neither does North England, but I'm afraid North England don't have the option of independence.
		
Click to expand...

A alternative view would be that, rather than a "bonus", the Labour votes in Scotland are a mainstay of the Labour share of the vote across the UK electorate.  If the vote was more evenly distributed across Tory and Labour in Scotland there could well have been a majority Tory government now.  

Would the Scottish then feel that they had elected?

Edit, I agree PR would be preferable.......


----------



## CMAC (Jun 25, 2014)

someone mentioned tonight the Pope has come out in favour of a NO vote


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 25, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			The Labour vote in Scotland is very important to returning a Labour Government as without them the Conservatives would be in a much stronger position.
		
Click to expand...

Just reflect about that for a few minutes.
Perhaps it would help if you identified who is in control of the Scottish government.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 25, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Many people vote conservative in the North of England.   The Labour vote in Scotland is very important to returning a Labour Government as without them the Conservatives would be in a much stronger position.

Still confuses me as to why anyone would want a Labour Government after the mess they leave behind every time they are in power!
		
Click to expand...




NWJocko said:



			A alternative view would be that, rather than a "bonus", the Labour votes in Scotland are a mainstay of the Labour share of the vote across the UK electorate.  If the vote was more evenly distributed across Tory and Labour in Scotland there could well have been a majority Tory government now.  

Would the Scottish then feel that they had elected?

Edit, I agree PR would be preferable.......
		
Click to expand...

We might be talking at cross purposes here.The fact is that if you remove the Scottish vote from pretty much every GE post WWII the party that won still won.Labour would still win ( they'd have less of a majority) Conservatives would still win.That would probably change under PR ( look at the more democratic Holyrood for Conservative representation) but right now, the Scottish vote is irrelevant at Westminster.

You could take it a step further and say the North of England vote is also irrelevant as the south east of England generally gets the govt they vote for.



CMAC said:



			someone mentioned tonight the Pope has come out in favour of a NO vote
		
Click to expand...

Recently we've had American President,Chinese President,The Pope and JK Rowling all come out in favour of NO.Only one of those peoples opinion counts...unless you take the opinion of leaders of the country renowned for human rights abuse, or the leader of the country who operates rendition or Guantanamo Bay or even the leader of a cult responsible for child abuse world wide as valid in this historic decision.

JKR deserves to be listened to, she lives here, has had a pretty significant role in turning young people onto books and she contributes greatly to Scottish society.The rest can do one.


----------



## IanG (Jun 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Recently we've had American President,Chinese President,The Pope and JK Rowling all come out in favour of NO.Only one of those peoples opinion counts...unless you take the opinion of leaders of the country renowned for human rights abuse, or the leader of the country who operates rendition or Guantanamo Bay or even the leader of a cult responsible for child abuse world wide as valid in this historic decision.

JKR deserves to be listened to, she lives here, has had a pretty significant role in turning young people onto books and she contributes greatly to Scottish society.The rest can do one.
		
Click to expand...


and that is something both the yes and no voters can agree on


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Point me in the direction where I've ever claimed to speak for all Scots please.*I thought it was pretty obvious my point of view is one of speaking from those seeking a yes victory* in September.

As for polls, I never ever pay any heed as they're skewed.The ones prior to the last Scottish elections are a case in point.

rant on btw, I find it entertaining.
		
Click to expand...

The bit where you said 'WE don't elect' defeats that argument tbh. 

On that point, it is a misleading argument at best, duplicitous at worst and is trotted out by the yes campaign all the time. 
The electorate elect an MP for their constituency and not a government (as I'm sure you're aware, you don't strike me as being daft). The political parties form the government after MPs have been elected. Scotland got the representation its electorate voted for.




On a side note. Is it just me that finds it difficult to understand why some people are still undecided? It seems like both sides have been campaigning, spinning and lying for years now; surely folks have heard enough to make a decision by now? I mean, you could be voting no, mind made up and then hear one thing that changes your mind. No problem. But to not know either way at this late stage indicates (to me) an inability to process information available and decide; meaning the decision could be made on a whim.

It's kind of worrying that the undecided actually have a say at this point.


----------



## CMAC (Jun 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			We might be talking at cross purposes here.The fact is that if you remove the Scottish vote from pretty much every GE post WWII the party that won still won.Labour would still win ( they'd have less of a majority) Conservatives would still win.That would probably change under PR ( look at the more democratic Holyrood for Conservative representation) but right now, the Scottish vote is irrelevant at Westminster.

You could take it a step further and say the North of England vote is also irrelevant as the south east of England generally gets the govt they vote for.



Recently we've had American President,Chinese President,The Pope and JK Rowling all come out in favour of NO.*Only one of those peoples opinion counts*...unless you take the opinion of leaders of the country renowned for human rights abuse, or the leader of the country who operates rendition or Guantanamo Bay or even the leader of a cult responsible for child abuse world wide as valid in this historic decision.

JKR deserves to be listened to, she lives here, has had a pretty significant role in turning young people onto books and she contributes greatly to Scottish society.*The rest can do one.*

Click to expand...

influence _counts_


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



*The bit where you said 'WE don't elect' defeats that argument tbh. *

On that point, it is a misleading argument at best, duplicitous at worst and is trotted out by the yes campaign all the time. 
The electorate elect an MP for their constituency and not a government (as I'm sure you're aware, you don't strike me as being daft). The political parties form the government after MPs have been elected. Scotland got the representation its electorate voted for.




On a side note. Is it just me that finds it difficult to understand why some people are still undecided? It seems like both sides have been campaigning, spinning and lying for years now; surely folks have heard enough to make a decision by now? I mean, you could be voting no, mind made up and then hear one thing that changes your mind. No problem. But to not know either way at this late stage indicates (to me) an inability to process information available and decide; meaning the decision could be made on a whim.

It's kind of worrying that the undecided actually have a say at this point.
		
Click to expand...

That's two different strands being cross talked so apologies for that.I stand by both claims, though.

The 'we' regarding the referendum I use is specifically the opinion from a yes perspective
The 'we' regarding GE's is also correct is it not?The Scottish vote, as 'we' are pretty irrelevant to Westminster results

The undecideds are strange lot.It looks like they could make up 25% of the voters.

What I have come across if folk moving from No to Yes or No to undecided.Once that move has begun I doubt folk will go No-undecided-No.And the No campaign will be praying for a lovely sunny day in September, because if it's minging they'll drop voters,whereas I don't think Yes will.


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Just reflect about that for a few minutes.
Perhaps it would help if you identified who is in control of the Scottish government.
		
Click to expand...

Scotland doesn't have it's own Government, it has a devolved parliament, you reflect on that for a bit before introducing more inaccurate nonsense.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Scotland doesn't have it's own Government, it has a devolved parliament, you reflect on that for a bit before introducing more inaccurate nonsense.
		
Click to expand...

What was that about inaccurate nonsense?

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/About


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			That's two different strands being cross talked so apologies for that.I stand by both claims, though.

The 'we' regarding the referendum I use is specifically the opinion from a yes perspective
The 'we' regarding GE's is also correct is it not?The Scottish vote, as 'we' are pretty irrelevant to Westminster results

The undecideds are strange lot.It looks like they could make up 25% of the voters.

What I have come across if folk moving from No to Yes or No to undecided.Once that move has begun I doubt folk will go No-undecided-No.And the No campaign will be praying for a lovely sunny day in September, because if it's minging they'll drop voters,whereas I don't think Yes will.
		
Click to expand...

No probs. I kinda knew what you were driving at, I was really using your post to highlight a bugbear of mine as it read the correct way to illustrate my point. 

Regarding the GE, I get what you are saying but again it's a bugbear the way the yes campaign spin it that I find annoying. You know, I'm a confirmed no voter, but if the snp (yep, I know it's a cross party thing, but they are at the forefront) conducted themselves a bit better, less spin and less haughty dismissive attitude to those who disagree coupled with 100% confirmation of black stuff off the West coast they may have got me listening. I reckon they've missed a trick tbh. Pity.

Edit: took out a quote I never intended to quote.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 25, 2014)

As an undecided I don't think I am strange!

Finance
Family
Politics
Safety
Society
Health
Education
The Pound


These are the main issues for me.

I doubt if the positive yes/no voters can tick all those boxes.


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			What was that about inaccurate nonsense?

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/About

Click to expand...

Ok it's a devolved government, limited powers which was my point.

Edit to add - my (possibly incorrect) assumption is based on DFT ramblings about non-elected government has me thinking he was refering to Westminster and not Holyrood


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



			You know, I'm a confirmed no voter, but if the snp (yep, I know it's a cross party thing, but they are at the forefront) conducted themselves a bit better, less spin and less haughty dismissive attitude to those who disagree coupled with *100% confirmation of black stuff off the West coast they may have got me listening. I reckon they've missed a trick tbh. Pity.*

Click to expand...

There is still time, it's all about the timing.I also think Henry McLeish has been awfy quiet given his stature in Scotland.I'm convinced he wants to come out for yes.

re:The SNP, they could be the architects of their own defeat on this and I'll certainly never vote for them.I'm still at a lose as to why Scottish Labour grasped the opportunity to join yes and defeat The SNP regardless of yes/no.


----------



## IanG (Jun 25, 2014)

I'm strange but not undecided.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Scotland doesn't have it's own Government, it has a devolved parliament, you reflect on that for a bit before introducing more inaccurate nonsense.
		
Click to expand...




Valentino said:



			Ok it's a devolved government, limited powers which was my point.
		
Click to expand...

More contradictions from The No camp! 

;-)


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There is still time, it's all about the timing.I also think Henry McLeish has been awfy quiet given his stature in Scotland.I'm convinced he wants to come out for yes.

re:The SNP, they could be the architects of their own defeat on this and I'll certainly never vote for them.I'm still at a lose as to why *Scottish Labour grasped the opportunity to join yes* and defeat The SNP regardless of yes/no.
		
Click to expand...

Possibly a majority decision within the party? I'm sure many members would be YES voters.


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			More contradictions from The No camp! 

;-)
		
Click to expand...

Read my edited post


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Possibly a majority decision within the party? I'm sure many members would be YES voters.
		
Click to expand...

I think they're scared of their own shadow and are being told in no uncertain terms by Milliband etc what to do.I'm not a massive fan of Johann Lamont, but she looks totally unconvinced by her own argument whenever I see her.That, along with a pathological hatred at Salmond is blinding Scottish Labour, if only they could see them joining YES is the easiest and quickest was of defeating Salmond long term.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			What was that about inaccurate nonsense?

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/About

Click to expand...


I may be wrong, not certain about this, but I'm pretty sure it is a devolved parliament and the SNP voted through a name change a few years back;  meaning it isn't actually a government as such. No? 

I remember ranting about the cost of changing all the branding etc when it happened, or did I???


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



			I may be wrong, not certain about this, but I'm pretty sure it is a devolved parliament and the SNP voted through a name change a few years back;  meaning it isn't actually a government as such. No? 

I remember ranting about the cost of changing all the branding etc when it happened, or did I??? 

Click to expand...

Yes and No...we're all winners!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Government


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Yes and No...we're all winners!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Government

Click to expand...

Nope. Can't have both of us being correct on here, that path leads to the dark side. So, we'll go 60/40 in my favour and shake on it.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Nope. Can't have both of us being correct on here, that path leads to the dark side. So, we'll go 60/40 in my favour and shake on it. 

Click to expand...

Seeing as though I'm keen to adopt the moral high ground and want to give the minor victories to my adversaries, deal.

My eye is on the big prize


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Seeing as though I'm keen to adopt the moral high ground and want to give the minor victories to my adversaries, deal.

My eye is on the big prize 

Click to expand...

Lol. I'll take the minors all day long.............mony a mickle maks a muckle* as my auld papa would have said. 


English translation. 
*many small things make a big thing.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



			I may be wrong, not certain about this, but I'm pretty sure it is a devolved parliament and the SNP voted through a name change a few years back;  meaning it isn't actually a government as such. No? 

I remember ranting about the cost of changing all the branding etc when it happened, or did I??? 

Click to expand...

It changed because virtually everyone including the BBC were calling it that.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Like many I got my 'better together' leaflet through the door this week.

It did not send me jumping oot of my seat waving a Union Jack.

On one hand they are telling us that we receive per head 10% more money than rUK then they say that we should stick with the big guys who represent 31 million UK taxpayers.

Well Scotland has a higher percentage of folk in work paying tax than rUK so I'm not sure that is a winner.
		
Click to expand...

This 10% figure.  It could well be real - through the Barnett formula (watch out for a cut if NO).  Or it could be the 10% not worse off if YES.


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			This 10% figure.  It could well be real - through the Barnett formula *(watch out for a cut if NO)*.  Or it could be the 10% not worse off if YES.
		
Click to expand...

Says who?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

JamPal said:



			Perhaps you are. 

I am also a NO, but live in England so have no say in the future of the UK. Which seems a shame, as I feel it will effect England and Wales too. That said, I do understand that this is about Scotland and for Scotland and so the Scots must decide. 

I would urge the independence voters to ignore much of the poor rhetoric coming from Westminster, it does the UK campaign no favours. The best reason to stay together is quite simple, strength in numbers. There are things all of us dislike about Westminster, but to just leave would be to throw the baby out with the bath water. I wish I could vote as I want you to stay, we are better together. the UK needs Scotland and Scotland is stronger standing beside the English and Welsh, rather than against us. And if you don't think voting yes is going against England and Wales, you need to stop and think how it will feel to us.
		
Click to expand...

Hi JamPal - you are a NO but don;t get a vote as you live in England - are you Scottish?  Just to understand broader context of your NO.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Says who?
		
Click to expand...

Just saying watch out for one - not saying that there will be one.

And I'll add that in the event of a NO *we* in England will be looking for strong justification from Westminster for maintaining a significant differential in what Scotland gets per head of pop.  Not saying the we all will be seeking a cut in the grant to Scotland - just a very good justification.  Because all that free stuff that Scots get, when we down here are getting screwed left, right and centre doesn't seem quite right.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Just saying watch out for one - not saying that there will be one.

And I'll add that in the event of a NO *we* in England will be looking for strong justification from Westminster for maintaining a significant differential in what Scotland gets per head of pop.  Not saying the we all will be seeking a cut in the grant to Scotland - just a very good justification.  Because all that free stuff that Scots get, when we down here are getting screwed left, right and centre doesn't seem quite right.
		
Click to expand...

More spending per head because more tax is raised per head maybe? 

Only a wiki link as I couldn't be arsed looking further. 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_Kingdom

I'll be voting no, but I don't like this thought that Scots are subsidy junkies!  

The figures are always going to be skewed anyway, England has a much larger population and would therefore require less spending per head on say a hospital than the other UK nations, simple math really. You would get a clearer picture if you took spending per head of population from geographical areas in England for comparison, say NW,NE,SW,SE,Midlands and London for example. Not sure how that would compare but I have a feeling it would paint a different picture perhaps.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			It changed because virtually everyone including the BBC were calling it that.
		
Click to expand...


So, I could be seeing my days out living in rUK watching the EPL ...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



			More spending per head because more tax is raised per head maybe? 

Only a wiki link as I couldn't be arsed looking further. 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_Kingdom

I'll be voting no, but I don't like this thought that Scots are subsidy junkies!  

The figures are always going to be skewed anyway, England has a much larger population and would therefore require less spending per head on say a hospital than the other UK nations, simple math really. You would get a clearer picture if you took spending per head of population from geographical areas in England for comparison, say NW,NE,SW,SE,Midlands and London for example. Not sure how that would compare but I have a feeling it would paint a different picture perhaps.
		
Click to expand...

That may all be true - but with the pressure on everything down here and cuts all over the place such logic and rationale may just not cut it for many.  

Simple tabloid headline is that Scots get more per head in grant from Westminster than those south of the border (yes - maybe a generalisation but that is tabloid headlines for you) - and not only that, these Scots get loads of stuff for free that those in England have to pay for.  The truth is what the people believe.  Scotland decides to stay part of the UK - great! then Scotland per head gets the same per head amount as the rest of UK.  If they wanted it differently they should have voted YES so the refrain may go.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			That may all be true - but with the pressure on everything down here and cuts all over the place such logic and rationale may just not cut it for many.  

Simple tabloid headline is that Scots get more per head in grant from Westminster than those south of the border (yes - maybe a generalisation but that is tabloid headlines for you) - and not only that, these Scots get loads of stuff for free that those in England have to pay for.  The truth is what the people believe.  Scotland decides to stay part of the UK - great! then Scotland per head gets the same per head amount as the rest of UK.  If they wanted it differently they should have voted YES so the refrain may go.
		
Click to expand...


Quite frankly, anyone stupid enough to believe tabloid headlines gets what they deserve imo, if they're that thick then they shouldn't really get involved. Harsh? Yes and I make no apologies for it. 

Having said that, you are correct (in a way) in saying the truth is what people believe. What doesn't help is people, whom one would assume know better than to believe tabloid headlines, perpetuate the nonsense/lie/garbage (whichever fits) by disseminating it to others in a manner that some may take as factual.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Quite frankly, anyone stupid enough to believe tabloid headlines gets what they deserve imo, if they're that thick then they shouldn't really get involved. Harsh? Yes and I make no apologies for it. 

Having said that, you are correct (in a way) in saying the truth is what people believe. What doesn't help is people, whom one would assume know better than to believe tabloid headlines, perpetuate the nonsense/lie/garbage (whichever fits) by disseminating it to others in a manner that some may take as factual.
		
Click to expand...

Quite a few in my club take this view.  It is simplistic; it may well be misguided and ill-informed; but it is what they believe.  They find it very difficult to separate higher per head funding from free services.  The former enables the latter - quite simple.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Quite a few in my club take this view.  It is simplistic; it may well be misguided and ill-informed; but it is what they believe.  They find it very difficult to separate higher per head funding from free services.  The former enables the latter - quite simple.
		
Click to expand...

Then you could be the very man to set them straight. 

It's a shame that scaremongering propaganda is so effective and the tabloids make a living off it. 

Another way to look at it is this: without London with its square mile and Scotland with its oil the country could be 3rd world economically. Ergo every other area is sponging off those two.


----------



## Hobbit (Jun 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



			More spending per head because more tax is raised per head maybe? 

Only a wiki link as I couldn't be arsed looking further. 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_Kingdom

I'll be voting no, but I don't like this thought that Scots are subsidy junkies!  

The figures are always going to be skewed anyway, England has a much larger population and would therefore require less spending per head on say a hospital than the other UK nations, simple math really. You would get a clearer picture if you took spending per head of population from geographical areas in England for comparison, say NW,NE,SW,SE,Midlands and London for example. Not sure how that would compare but I have a feeling it would paint a different picture perhaps.
		
Click to expand...

I think its more complex than the spending per head. The cost of a hospital bed in England is the same as the cost in Scotland, but the hospitals are usually bigger - note usually. I'm well aware of the size of the likes of the (new) Southern General in Glasgow.

Saying a hospital in Scotland costs the same as one in England ignores the fact that most hospitals built in England are usually bigger because of population densities.... so although the cost per head is less, the actual cost of the build is more... its them damned statistics, and lies, again.


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

Remember what we appear to get for "free" is often not all it seems, it's paid for elsewhere. No such thing as a free breakfast, just ask Holiday Inn Express


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Remember what we appear to get for "free" is often not all it seems, it's paid for elsewhere. No such thing as a free breakfast, just ask Holiday Inn Express 

Click to expand...


Fair enough... But one thing I found hard to stomach was all the years I paid for my prescriptions whilst all those outside England didn't... Past caring now as I'm of an age where mine are free but herself still has to purchase an annual ticket... I am sure its balanced out somewhere just not obvious to an old whinger like me...


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 25, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Fair enough... But one thing I found hard to stomach was all the years I paid for my prescriptions whilst all those outside England didn't... Past caring now as I'm of an age where mine are free but herself still has to purchase an annual ticket... I am sure its balanced out somewhere just not obvious to an old whinger like me...
		
Click to expand...

The free prescriptions thing really annoys me. NHS Scotland has a budget and chooses (or maybe has been dictated to by government) to provide free prescriptions.

NHS in England uses its budget differently, in a less populist but probably more effective way. For example, on some modern cancer drugs which are available in England for the cost of a prescription but not available at all up here.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			The free prescriptions thing really annoys me. NHS Scotland has a budget and chooses (or maybe has been dictated to by government) to provide free prescriptions.

NHS in England uses its budget differently, in a less populist but probably more effective way. For example, on some modern cancer drugs which are available in England for the cost of a prescription but not available at all up here.
		
Click to expand...

When you say government do you mean Westminster or Holyrood?

Distribution of the latest whizz bang drugs is pretty regionalised south of the wall...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 25, 2014)

My English friends in Essex and Wiltshire tell me of 2/3 week waits to get a GP appointment.
That is one way of being 'less populist'.

I don't think that would be tolerated in Scotland.

My wife was signed off from cancer care in England only to find that when she moved to Scotland they continued to monitor her for an additional 2 years. Mind you I don't think she was too pleased with that!


----------



## NWJocko (Jun 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			My English friends in Essex and Wiltshire tell me of 2/3 week waits to get a GP appointment.
That is one way of being 'less populist'.

I don't think that would be tolerated in Scotland.

at!
		
Click to expand...

It was when I lived in Edinburgh and had lengthy waits for appointments.

I can now phone any day and get an appointment :thup:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 25, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			It was when I lived in Edinburgh and had lengthy waits for appointments.

I can now phone any day and get an appointment :thup:
		
Click to expand...

But when


----------



## NWJocko (Jun 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			But when

Click to expand...

Same day I should have added.

If Scotland is already streets ahead of England in every way, as this sort of nonsense you post implies, why do you want independence...?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 25, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			When you say government do you mean Westminster or Holyrood?

Distribution of the latest whizz bang drugs is pretty regionalised south of the wall...
		
Click to expand...

Holyrood - buying votes through short-term populist policies.

Presumably the regionalised availability of drugs down there is due to regional NHS budgets and different spending priorities?


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			I think its more complex than the spending per head. The cost of a hospital bed in England is the same as the cost in Scotland, but the hospitals are usually bigger - note usually. I'm well aware of the size of the likes of the (new) Southern General in Glasgow.

Saying a hospital in Scotland costs the same as one in England ignores the fact that most hospitals built in England are usually bigger because of population densities.... so although the cost per head is less, the actual cost of the build is more... its them damned statistics, and lies, again.
		
Click to expand...


Yep, totally agree. It's a lot more complicated than the tabloids say. There's a lot taken into account when working out government spend. Hence the reason I argued the original comment was disingenuous.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 25, 2014)

I've never had to wait more than 24 hours to see a doctor in Edinburgh.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Remember what we appear to get for "free" is often not all it seems, it's paid for elsewhere. No such thing as a free breakfast, just ask Holiday Inn Express 

Click to expand...

Don't know about them, but I've had a few free breakfasts in my time.


----------



## NWJocko (Jun 25, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've never had to wait more than 24 hours to see a doctor in Edinburgh.
		
Click to expand...

Emergency appointment?

I suspect the same is true in Essex, routine appointments may well have a couple of weeks wait in the south

Wasnt the case when I was there, albeit some time ago now, glad its improved.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			My English friends in Essex and Wiltshire tell me of 2/3 week waits to get a GP appointment.
That is one way of being 'less populist'.

I don't think that would be tolerated in Scotland.

My wife was signed off from cancer care in England only to find that when she moved to Scotland they continued to monitor her for an additional 2 years. Mind you I don't think she was too pleased with that!
		
Click to expand...

I can get a same day appointment if I phone at 8.00 am and it's an "emergency". Otherwise it's just your luck, might get an appointment in a couple of days or a couple of weeks.


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Don't know about them, but I've had a few free breakfasts in my time. 

Click to expand...

They've just been told that offering a "free" breakfast is false advertising as you can't book a bed without breakfast, they need to change their wording.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			My English friends in Essex and Wiltshire tell me of 2/3 week waits to get a GP appointment.
That is one way of being 'less populist'.

I don't think that would be tolerated in Scotland.

My wife was signed off from cancer care in England only to find that when she moved to Scotland they continued to monitor her for an additional 2 years. Mind you I don't think she was too pleased with that!
		
Click to expand...


The care my good lady wife has had at Charing Cross Hospital has been nothing but first class... The tories are seeking to shut this excellent facility with no obvious replacement... Perhaps the main reason they 'lost' at the recent council elections... Running down of NHS is not as you may think being "tolerated" in these parts...


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			They've just been told that offering a "free" breakfast is false advertising as you can't book a bed without breakfast, they need to change their wording.
		
Click to expand...

Ahhh I see,  I wasn't aware of that.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 25, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Presumably the regionalised availability of drugs down there is due to regional NHS budgets and different spending priorities?
		
Click to expand...

I am sure the many layers of upper middle lower management don't help the 'situation'....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

The logic and rationale behind the differentials in per head spending across the UK are one thing - the unfortunate truth seems to be fact that most who will spout on about these differentials by regurgitating tabloid headlines do not really have any interest in that rationale.  

As for many emotive political issues their truth is simple to understand and state.  Scots electorate get more funding per head than the English electorate and the Scots get stuff free that the English don't.  One is the consequence of the other.  That is unfair to some if not many of the English electorate and when Scotland votes NO they will have an expectation that that imbalance should be addressed.  And in the run-up to the next Westminster GE there will be pressure on parties and candidates to address the imbalance - Scotland having decided to stay in the UK after all.  If we are all in it together we should all feel the same pain.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 25, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Emergency appointment?

I suspect the same is true in Essex, routine appointments may well have a couple of weeks wait in the south

Wasnt the case when I was there, albeit some time ago now, glad its improved.
		
Click to expand...

I dunno tbh.I rarely go to the docs, but when I need to, I call and they offer me a/b/c and I chose.This is based on Portobello surgery,


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Scots get stuff free that the English don't.
		
Click to expand...

OK, so once in a while I save Â£8.05 on a prescription. What other "stuff" do I get for free?


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The logic and rationale behind the differentials in per head spending across the UK are one thing - the unfortunate truth seems to be fact that most who will spout on about these differentials by regurgitating tabloid headlines do not really have any interest in that rationale.  

As for many emotive political issues their truth is simple to understand and state.  Scots electorate get more funding per head than the English electorate and the Scots get stuff free that the English don't.  One is the consequence of the other.  That is unfair to some if not many of the English electorate and when Scotland votes NO they will have an expectation that that imbalance should be addressed.  And in the run-up to the next Westminster GE there will be pressure on parties and candidates to address the imbalance - Scotland having decided to stay in the UK after all.  If we are all in it together we should all feel the same pain.
		
Click to expand...

Feel the same pain? What's the average wage in Surrey? Comparable with Ayrshire?  

As mentioned previously 'their truth' is easier to state when those who should know better regurgitate the tabloid line instead of questioning it! 

I hope they do address the imbalance and get the rest of the UK to pay more tax per head and bring it in line with Scots, share the pain and all that. 

Btw, where do I get this free stuff from? I want some.


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The logic and rationale behind the differentials in per head spending across the UK are one thing - the unfortunate truth seems to be fact that most who will spout on about these differentials by regurgitating tabloid headlines do not really have any interest in that rationale.  
*
As for many emotive political issues their truth is simple to understand and state.  Scots electorate get more funding per head than the English electorate and the Scots get stuff free that the English don't.*  One is the consequence of the other.  That is unfair to some if not many of the English electorate and when Scotland votes NO they will have an expectation that that imbalance should be addressed.  And in the run-up to the next Westminster GE there will be pressure on parties and candidates to address the imbalance - Scotland having decided to stay in the UK after all.  If we are all in it together we should all feel the same pain.
		
Click to expand...

If it's simple then why are you having trouble understanding it?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

Guys - are you being deliberately obtuse in misinterpreting my posts on 'free' stuff.  These are not *my *thoughts - they are what some (or many?) *others* in England seem think.  I am simply reporting what some - inside of and outside my club - have said to me.  And they aren't stupid - it's what they think and so I assume believe.  Please don't shoot the messenger.  Simply saying that this could be an issue for Holyrood following a NO vote.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Guys - are you being deliberately obtuse in misinterpreting my posts on 'free' stuff.  These are not *my *thoughts - they are what some (or many?) *others* in England seem think.  I am simply reporting what some - inside of and outside my club - have said to me.  And they aren't stupid - it's what they think and so I assume believe.  Please don't shoot the messenger.  Simply saying that this could be an issue for Holyrood following a NO vote.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry hogan, I don't want to speak ill of your friends but if they believe tabloid headlines then as far as I'm concerned they are beyond stupid!

Point taken its not your view.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 25, 2014)

As my wife and I are both pensioners we don't get any free stuff/benefits at all.
Who should I complain to?


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Guys - are you being deliberately obtuse in misinterpreting my posts on 'free' stuff.  These are not *my *thoughts - they are what some (or many?) *others* in England seem think.  I am simply reporting what some - inside of and outside my club - have said to me.  And they aren't stupid - it's what they think and so I assume believe.  Please don't shoot the messenger.  Simply saying that this could be an issue for Holyrood following a NO vote.
		
Click to expand...

You have continually used this free stuff nonsense in your posts hence why you get the responses you get


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Sorry hogan, I don't want to speak ill of your friends but if they believe tabloid headlines then as far as I'm concerned they are beyond stupid!

Point taken its not your view.
		
Click to expand...

They are not stupid but just don't get it.  And so they are questioning the 'imbalance' and the 'free stuff'.  I am not saying that a majority of English voters think this way but I suspect that many do.  Feel free to call them stupid but I suggest that in the event of a NO their voice on this matter will be shrill and loud.  North of the border you might not hear it at the moment but I suspect that you will.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You have continually used this free stuff nonsense in your posts hence why you get the responses you get
		
Click to expand...

I use the term 'free stuff' as that is what I have regularly heard it referred to down here - it is not my 'nonsense' - and there is resentment.


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			They are not stupid but just don't get it.  And so they are questioning the 'imbalance' and the 'free stuff'.  I am not saying that a majority of English voters think this way but I suspect that many do.  Feel free to call them stupid but I suggest that in the event of a NO their voice on this matter will be shrill and loud.  North of the border you might not hear it at the moment but I suspect that you will.
		
Click to expand...

Will or might?


----------



## CMAC (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			They are not stupid but just don't get it.  And so they are questioning the 'imbalance' and the 'free stuff'.  I am not saying that a majority of English voters think this way but I suspect that many do.  Feel free to call them stupid but I suggest that *in the event of a NO their voice on this matter will be shrill and loud at the Golf club, and ignored elsewhere*  North of the border you might not hear it at the moment but I suspect that you will.
		
Click to expand...

added and fixed that for you


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Feel the same pain? What's the average wage in Surrey? Comparable with Ayrshire?
		
Click to expand...

I'll counter with the easy one - What's the average house price in Ayrshire? Comparable with Surrey?


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I use the term 'free stuff' as that is what I have regularly heard it referred to down here - it is not my 'nonsense' - and there is resentment.
		
Click to expand...

If it's not your why do you continue to use it? My suggestion is you agree with it


----------



## CMAC (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I use the term 'free stuff' as that is what I have regularly heard it referred to down here - *it is not my 'nonsense' - and there is resentment*.
		
Click to expand...

which stems from ignorance!


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'll counter with the easy one - What's the average house price in Ayrshire? Comparable with Surrey?
		
Click to expand...

Cheaper, people in Surrey pay more as they get paid more


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

CMAC said:



			added and fixed that for you
		
Click to expand...

Nope - don't quite get your changes.  Are you suggesting that only folk at my golf club care about this and nobody else in England outside of a golf club cares?  You are wrong if you think that.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Cheaper, people in Surrey pay more as they get paid more
		
Click to expand...

Don't think so...

Some may get paid more but it doesn't much help my cost of living.


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Don't think so...
		
Click to expand...

Really, so the average salary in Ayrshire is the same as Surrey?


----------



## CMAC (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



*Nope - don't quite get your changes*.  Are you suggesting that only folk at my golf club care about this and nobody else in England outside of a golf club cares?  You are wrong if you think that.
		
Click to expand...

read it again then, it's very clear


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

CMAC said:



			read it again then, it's very clear
		
Click to expand...

I did - and it's not - it's ambiguous.

_'...in the event of a NO their voice on this matter will be shrill and loud at the Golf club, and ignored elsewhere North of the border you might not hear it at the moment but I suspect that you will'_

Are you saying that what is said about this subject in my golf club in England will be ignored elsewhere in England - or that what is said in my golf club will be ignored north of the border


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Don't think so...

Some may get paid more but it doesn't much help my cost of living.
		
Click to expand...


Some.....you are joking.
What is the going hourly rate for a gardener/plumber/carpenter/mechanic etc in Surrey.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'll counter with the easy one - What's the average house price in Ayrshire? Comparable with Surrey?
		
Click to expand...

You pay more to live in a nicer area obviously.  That has nothing to do with earning power which has a direct affect on how much 'shared pain' you experience. 

Edit: House prices should only affect you directly if you are planning on buying or selling, wages affect you day in day out.

With all due respect I think you are completely detached from the debate up here and it shows in some of the post content. That's not intended to put you down or be in any way defamatory btw, I'd be the same if it were a debate on Surrey or elsewhere probably, so I wouldn't worry about it too much.  
Come the election I'm quite sure the guys in the golf club will have moved on to another scapegoat for all the ills in the country, looking in from afar I'm guessing it will be UKIP and Johnny foreigner that will be to the fore........again.


----------



## Hobbit (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Don't think so...

Some may get paid more but it doesn't much help my cost of living.
		
Click to expand...

We've got 75 engineers/technicians based around the UK, inc the southeast and around Scotland. Same salaries.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 25, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			We've got 75 engineers/technicians based around the UK, inc the southeast and around Scotland. Same salaries.
		
Click to expand...

...there seems to be a view harboured up north that those of us 'lucky' enough to live in the 'affluent' southeast get paid loads and are loaded.  I wish.

I'm also confused about why my comments suggest that I am detached from the debate in Scotland.  My observations on such as 'free stuff' are not mine. They are the comments of some of my English friends and colleagues.  I am only trying to add a perspective on the debate from down here.  If you chose to ignore the thoughts of some south of the border on the grounds of their being irrelevant to the debate then feel free


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 25, 2014)

Interesting!

Average salaries.

London Â£ 35.5
Aberdeen Â£34.9
Edinburgh Â£28.7
Bristol Â£28.5
Glasgow Â£27.4
Manchester Â£27.4
Birmingham Â£26.3.

Quite surprised by that.


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Interesting!

Average salaries.

London Â£ 35.5
Aberdeen Â£34.9
Edinburgh Â£28.7
Bristol Â£28.5
Glasgow Â£27.4
Manchester Â£27.4
Birmingham Â£26.3.

Quite surprised by that.
		
Click to expand...

So what is it in Surrey?


----------



## Val (Jun 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...there seems to be a view harboured up north that those of us 'lucky' enough to live in the 'affluent' southeast get paid loads and are loaded.  I wish.

I'm also confused about why my comments suggest that I am detached from the debate in Scotland.  My observations on such as 'free stuff' are not mine. They are the comments of some of my English friends and colleagues.  I am only trying to add a perspective on the debate from down here.  If you chose to ignore the thoughts of some south of the border on the grounds of their being irrelevant to the debate then feel free 

Click to expand...

Remind us why you moved south again, I'm sure page and pages ago you mentioned financial benefits as part of the reason.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 26, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			We've got 75 engineers/technicians based around the UK, inc the southeast and around Scotland. Same salaries.
		
Click to expand...


Wot? No London weighting .... Doon will be pleased ...


In my experience the vast majority, in these parts, ain't fussed either way about Scottish independence... Far greater 'worries' [perceived or otherwise] closer to home... If devo max was an option [for Scotland] then they may have had some real concerns about the outcome...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 26, 2014)

Scottish Government have just voted to stop 'right to buy' of council houses.
Is that something rUK should follow?


----------



## c1973 (Jun 26, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Scottish Government have just voted to stop 'right to buy' of council houses.
Is that something rUK should follow?
		
Click to expand...

Yes. 

Provided there are social housing shortages the right to buy should be scrapped. It should never have started imo.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 26, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Remind us why you moved south again, I'm sure page and pages ago you mentioned financial benefits as part of the reason.
		
Click to expand...

I moved south to Bristol in 1984 as I qualified and I could not find a job in Scotland that would mean I could use my degree.  I would have preferred to stay in Scotland - but I got on my bike.  And average salary in Surrey is going to be similar to London I'd guess.  Â£10K a year doesn't go far when trying to afford a mortgage for a house down here.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 26, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Yes. 

Provided there are social housing shortages the right to buy should be scrapped. It should never have started imo.
		
Click to expand...

I agree - been a disaster for meeting housing needs.  A neat Thatcherite vote winning strategy.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 26, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Yes. 

Provided there are social housing shortages the right to buy should be scrapped. It should never have started imo.
		
Click to expand...

Agree with this.An opportunity for both Westminster and Holyrood to kick start the building trade by investing hugely in social housing.I think the current deal for builders is you build 100 houses to sell you must build 25 social houses?Increase that, stop letting big building companies land bank brown field sites preferring to build vacuums out of town and build schools/etc close tothe social housing.The docks of Edinburgh are a prime example of this.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 26, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I agree - been a disaster for meeting housing needs.  A neat Thatcherite vote winning strategy.
		
Click to expand...




Adi2Dassler said:



			Agree with this.An opportunity for both Westminster and Holyrood to kick start the building trade by investing hugely in social housing.I think the current deal for builders is you build 100 houses to sell you must build 25 social houses?Increase that, stop letting big building companies land bank brown field sites preferring to build vacuums out of town and build schools/etc close tothe social housing.The docks of Edinburgh are a prime example of this.
		
Click to expand...

I've never had a problem with the concept as long as like was replaced with like, problem was it never was. Nothing wrong with aiding people to get on the property ladder, but not at the expense of the next generation who found and are still finding a severe lack of social housing. 

I applaud the SNP for this decision (law of averages meant they were bound to get something right!  ). 

Adi, not sure about exact numbers but from memory I think the local council round here knocked down around 350 properties (a good mixture of decent sized flats and houses) and another social landlord replaced them with around 250 hen huts. 100 fewer properties, local rag headlines 250 new houses! Absolutely scandalous imo.


----------



## Val (Jun 26, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I moved south to Bristol in 1984 as I qualified and I could not find a job in Scotland that would mean I could use my degree.  I would have preferred to stay in Scotland - but I got on my bike.  And average salary in Surrey is going to be similar to London I'd guess.  *Â£10K a year doesn't go far when trying to afford a mortgage for a house down here*.
		
Click to expand...

Really? Even basing on 40% tax it's Â£500 a month extra, that would pay Â£100k mortgage over 25 years at current rates. Are you seriously telling me a like for like house in Surrey over Ayrshire is over Â£100k more?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jun 26, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Really? Even basing on 40% tax it's Â£500 a month extra, that would pay Â£100k mortgage over 25 years at current rates. Are you seriously telling me a like for like house in Surrey over Ayrshire is over Â£100k more?
		
Click to expand...

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property...oms=3&sortType=1&numberOfPropertiesPerPage=10

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property...oms=3&sortType=1&numberOfPropertiesPerPage=10

It looks to me like "Surrey" is a lot more expensive, yes.

And that assumes that the Â£500 per month isn't eaten into with the cost of other items being more expensive (council tax/food/etc)


----------



## Val (Jun 26, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property...oms=3&sortType=1&numberOfPropertiesPerPage=10

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property...oms=3&sortType=1&numberOfPropertiesPerPage=10

It looks to me like "Surrey" is a lot more expensive, yes.

And that assumes that the Â£500 per month isn't eaten into with the cost of other items being more expensive (council tax/food/etc)
		
Click to expand...

Maybe using Surrey - Ayrshire generic isn't quite right given population density but like for like housing in similar towns I'd agree in Surrey you'll pay more but I'd be surprised if it's as much as Â£100k more, I might be wrong but would be genuinely surprised.

Best comparison would probably be Camberley to Troon.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 26, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property...oms=3&sortType=1&numberOfPropertiesPerPage=10

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property...oms=3&sortType=1&numberOfPropertiesPerPage=10

It looks to me like "Surrey" is a lot more expensive, yes.

And that assumes that the Â£500 per month isn't eaten into with the cost of other items being more expensive (council tax/food/etc)
		
Click to expand...

If you look at page 5 of both counties the Surrey properties are three times more expensive than comparable Ayrshire properties.


----------



## CMAC (Jun 26, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property...oms=3&sortType=1&numberOfPropertiesPerPage=10

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property...oms=3&sortType=1&numberOfPropertiesPerPage=10

*It looks to me like "Surrey" is a lot more expensive, yes.*

And that assumes that the Â£500 per month isn't eaten into with the cost of other items being more expensive (council tax/food/etc)
		
Click to expand...

yup of course it is, it's Surrey (beautiful countryside, beautiful villages, great weather)  and Ayrshire!



location location location


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 26, 2014)

CMAC said:



			yup of course it is, it's Surrey (beautiful countryside, beautiful villages, great weather)  and Ayrshire!



location location location
		
Click to expand...

I have lived 10 years in one and 15 years in the other.
Ayrshire wins on most counts but Surrey has better villages and pubs.

I recall loads of thieving going on in Surrey when I lived there in the 1970's.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 26, 2014)

Now I am concerned... Been told that when those north of the wall pick up their kilts and depart it has been suggested that 'we' be rebranded as Future United Kingdom... I thought rUK was bad enough ...


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 26, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Now I am concerned... Been told that when those north of the wall pick up their kilts and depart it has been suggested that 'we' be rebranded as Future United Kingdom... I thought rUK was bad enough ...
		
Click to expand...

fUK?


----------



## JamPal (Jun 26, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Do you mean RBS? bank bail outs rely on the country in question taking the share of bad debt accumulated in their country...the city of london was responsible for the majority of that debt.Google fortis dexia for a better explanation.

And we don't want to isolate, we want to be good international partners, just on our own terms and not those thrust upon us by *govts we don't elect.*

Click to expand...

This is the biggest lie of the yes campaign. 

It's based on the false premise that Scotland is somehow already seperate from the rest of the UK. It's as false an argument as suggesting the people of Sussex* didn't elect the last Labour government. As part of the UK, the borders (while not meaningless) only have a value emotionally and not in any reality.

It's a total straw man. 

Why do the Yes campaigners persist with this lie? As for not wanting to isolate.. derp.. that IS what you will be doing, like it or not. Another Salmondism. He's such a small minded, chippy little fella, and seems determined to turn us all against each other.

It's a bloody shame so many Scot's feel this way, certainly Westminster has to shoulder some of that blame. I would much prefer us to deal with that problem together, rather than just tearing the union apart. That seems wholly counter-productive. 

*And yes, i understand the difference between a county and a country.


----------



## CMAC (Jun 26, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I have lived 10 years in one and 15 years in the other.
Ayrshire wins on most counts but Surrey has better villages and pubs.

*I recall loads of thieving going on in Surrey when I lived there in the 1970's.*

Click to expand...

and when you moved back to Ayrshire it stopped..................:ears:






/da boom boom tish!


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 26, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			fUK?
		
Click to expand...


Exactly ...


----------



## JamPal (Jun 26, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Now I am concerned... Been told that when those north of the wall pick up their kilts and depart it has been suggested that 'we' be rebranded as Future United Kingdom... I thought rUK was bad enough ...
		
Click to expand...

It's the UK now and if the Scot's leave it will still be called the UK. The concept that the UK will somehow have to change or share whatever it has with those deserting it is odd. Not to mention worrying for the Scot's and laughable in it's Salmondy arrogance.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 26, 2014)

CMAC said:



			and when you moved back to Ayrshire it stopped..................:ears:






/da boom boom tish!
		
Click to expand...

Not quite, I went thieving in Suffolk and Wiltshire before that!


----------



## CMAC (Jun 26, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not quite, I went thieving in Suffolk and Wiltshire before that!
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:

:thup:


----------



## Hobbit (Jun 26, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If you look at page 5 of both counties the Surrey properties are three times more expensive than comparable Ayrshire properties.
		
Click to expand...

And if you search Glasgow and London on page 3...? Sorry Doon but once again you're twisting and turning the facts to suit.

Don't get me wrong, if I was a Scot living in Scotland, I'd vote for self determination. But all the spin is just plain sad and totally disingenuous.

Vote from the heart, and rollox to all the spin.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 27, 2014)

I had an interesting conversation yesterday with someone 'well connected' and they said that if Scotland become independent Ryanair plan to use Prestwick airport as their long haul hub.


----------



## Hobbit (Jun 27, 2014)

I think the chairman of Ryanair said pretty much the same in a TV interview a couple of months back.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I had an interesting conversation yesterday with someone 'well connected' and they said that if Scotland become independent Ryanair plan to use Prestwick airport as their long haul hub.
		
Click to expand...

Yep, most of his airports are in the middle of nowhere.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 27, 2014)

JamPal said:



			It's the UK now and if the Scot's leave it will still be called the UK. The concept that the UK will somehow have to change or share whatever it has with those deserting it is odd. Not to mention worrying for the Scot's and laughable in it's Salmondy arrogance.
		
Click to expand...


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-27867406

Just in case you thought I was making it up...


----------



## Val (Jun 27, 2014)

The thought of flying a 45 minute flight with Ryanair is bad enough never mind long haul, it's easy for Ryanair to say the will use Prestwick for long haul when they don't have a long haul service, they have been talking about this for years but all we hear is talk from Michael O'leary as normal.

Non story from the YES camp IMO


----------



## CMAC (Jun 27, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-27867406

Just in case you thought I was making it up...
		
Click to expand...

I did think it was a wind up that had suddenly morphed into fact, so thanks for posting the link to the facts.


Personally I thinks its brilliant, I can now type and say fUK all day anywhere without fear of chastisement :lol:


I dont want to belong to fUK, I want UK.


If (absolutely NO CHANCE) the dence vote indepen_dence_ the UK will still be the UK, it will not be fUK or any derivative of that.


The fact some people can get their name in the papers spouting such drivvel is testamount to its credence.


----------



## CMAC (Jun 27, 2014)

Valentino said:



			The thought of flying a 45 minute flight with Ryanair is bad enough never mind long haul, it's easy for Ryanair to say the will use Prestwick for long haul when they don't have a long haul service, they have been talking about this for years but all we hear is talk from Michael O'leary as normal.

Non story from the YES camp IMO
		
Click to expand...

agreed. :thup:


I can counter that with John and Margarets dog grooming business that have categorically stated they will move their Global Headquarters OUT of Scotland should the dence win. There are many other Global Headquarters all saying similar.:smirk:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 27, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-27867406

Just in case you thought I was making it up...
		
Click to expand...

Six months ago I got severe pelters from the forum when I 'floated' the fUK idea.
I was joking but it seems like some of the big wigs are not!!


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Six months ago I got severe pelters from the forum when I 'floated' the fUK idea.
I was joking but it seems like some of the big wigs are not!!
		
Click to expand...

Many of your comments have resembled 'Floaters'


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 27, 2014)

My neighbour has just popped round and informed me that the state of my finances is very worrying and that I should let him take control.
Apparently I don't have the knowledge or the resources to properly manage my affairs, so he is going to take full control of my income and give me back a monthly allowance (obviously less whatever expenses he incurs to provide this service for me).
My home, car, etc. will also become the property of my neighbour, although I will still have full use of them for the time being (providing I continue to pay the mortgage, loans, taxes, etc., and an administration fee obviously).
He has also said that if I don't do it then I won't be able to remain a member of the local social club, apparently there's a Spanish committee member that says that the club won't allow any members in that refuse my neighbours financial services. They've also said that they won't accept my cash there either, and I will have to buy special pound tokens which I can buy at the reception (for a similar amount, less commission charges).
My neighbour also states he has the right to cut my monthly allowance as he sees fit, and can deduct additional costs from my budget if I decide I need to visit the doctor (or want my bins emptied).
My neighbour has also stated that I need to contribute towards him getting away for regular breaks to his favourite city, and I've also got to chip in for the drinks tab for his posh friends that have booked a couple of rooms in the same hotel.
I have to say that I am quite sceptical of his offer, and how it is actually going to improve my life and my finances, but he is adamant that we will be Better Together.
Is it possible he might be telling lies?


----------



## c1973 (Jun 27, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Yep, most of his airports are in the middle of nowhere.
		
Click to expand...

Tbf Prestwick actually has better links to Glasgow than Glasgow airport (no rail link, quashed by the SNP) does! Only in Scotland! 
Plus it's a better 'golf' airport (we've got better courses here)


----------



## c1973 (Jun 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			My neighbour has just popped round and informed me that the state of my finances is very worrying and that I should let him take control.
Apparently I don't have the knowledge or the resources to properly manage my affairs, so he is going to take full control of my income and give me back a monthly allowance (obviously less whatever expenses he incurs to provide this service for me).
My home, car, etc. will also become the property of my neighbour, although I will still have full use of them for the time being (providing I continue to pay the mortgage, loans, taxes, etc., and an administration fee obviously).
He has also said that if I don't do it then I won't be able to remain a member of the local social club, apparently there's a Spanish committee member that says that the club won't allow any members in that refuse my neighbours financial services. They've also said that they won't accept my cash there either, and I will have to buy special pound tokens which I can buy at the reception (for a similar amount, less commission charges).
My neighbour also states he has the right to cut my monthly allowance as he sees fit, and can deduct additional costs from my budget if I decide I need to visit the doctor (or want my bins emptied).
My neighbour has also stated that I need to contribute towards him getting away for regular breaks to his favourite city, and I've also got to chip in for the drinks tab for his posh friends that have booked a couple of rooms in the same hotel.
I have to say that I am quite sceptical of his offer, and how it is actually going to improve my life and my finances, but he is adamant that we will be Better Together.
Is it possible he might be telling lies?



Click to expand...

Sounds like a caring and considerate neighbour, lucky you to have such a good friend looking out for you.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			My neighbour has just popped round and informed me that the state of my finances is very worrying and that I should let him take control.
Apparently I don't have the knowledge or the resources to properly manage my affairs, so he is going to take full control of my income and give me back a monthly allowance (obviously less whatever expenses he incurs to provide this service for me).
My home, car, etc. will also become the property of my neighbour, although I will still have full use of them for the time being (providing I continue to pay the mortgage, loans, taxes, etc., and an administration fee obviously).
He has also said that if I don't do it then I won't be able to remain a member of the local social club, apparently there's a Spanish committee member that says that the club won't allow any members in that refuse my neighbours financial services. They've also said that they won't accept my cash there either, and I will have to buy special pound tokens which I can buy at the reception (for a similar amount, less commission charges).
My neighbour also states he has the right to cut my monthly allowance as he sees fit, and can deduct additional costs from my budget if I decide I need to visit the doctor (or want my bins emptied).
My neighbour has also stated that I need to contribute towards him getting away for regular breaks to his favourite city, and I've also got to chip in for the drinks tab for his posh friends that have booked a couple of rooms in the same hotel.
I have to say that I am quite sceptical of his offer, and how it is actually going to improve my life and my finances, but he is adamant that we will be Better Together.
Is it possible he might be telling lies?



Click to expand...

Does he spend the run up to each golf club championship telling you how good he is, claiming to belong to the best Sunday rollup in the club and reminding you of his amazing championship victory back in the late sixties? Before lamenting his inevitable elimination by one of those Schmidt brothers (after extra holes, of course).


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 27, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Does he spend the run up to each golf club championship telling you how good he is, claiming to belong to the best Sunday rollup in the club and reminding you of his amazing championship victory back in the late sixties? Before lamenting his inevitable elimination by one of those Schmidt brothers (after extra holes, of course).
		
Click to expand...


Nope.


----------



## CMAC (Jun 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			My neighbour has just popped round and informed me that the state of my finances is very worrying and that I should let him take control.
Apparently I don't have the knowledge or the resources to properly manage my affairs, so he is going to take full control of my income and give me back a monthly allowance (obviously less whatever expenses he incurs to provide this service for me).
My home, car, etc. will also become the property of my neighbour, although I will still have full use of them for the time being (providing I continue to pay the mortgage, loans, taxes, etc., and an administration fee obviously).
He has also said that if I don't do it then I won't be able to remain a member of the local social club, apparently there's a Spanish committee member that says that the club won't allow any members in that refuse my neighbours financial services. They've also said that they won't accept my cash there either, and I will have to buy special pound tokens which I can buy at the reception (for a similar amount, less commission charges).
My neighbour also states he has the right to cut my monthly allowance as he sees fit, and can deduct additional costs from my budget if I decide I need to visit the doctor (or want my bins emptied).
My neighbour has also stated that I need to contribute towards him getting away for regular breaks to his favourite city, and I've also got to chip in for the drinks tab for his posh friends that have booked a couple of rooms in the same hotel.
I have to say that I am quite sceptical of his offer, and how it is actually going to improve my life and my finances, but he is adamant that we will be Better Together.
Is it possible he might be telling lies?



Click to expand...

is your neighbour a Mr A Salmond?

he's got form for this type of behaviour and has been trying this on all over the neighbourhood.


----------



## Val (Jun 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			My neighbour has just popped round and informed me that the state of my finances is very worrying and that *I should let him take control.*
Apparently I don't have the knowledge or the resources to properly manage my affairs, so he is going to take full control of my income and give me back a monthly allowance (obviously less whatever expenses he incurs to provide this service for me).
My home, car, etc. will also become the property of my neighbour, although I will still have full use of them for the time being (providing I continue to pay the mortgage, loans, taxes, etc., and an administration fee obviously).
He has also said that if I don't do it then I won't be able to remain a member of the local social club, apparently there's a Spanish committee member that says that the club won't allow any members in that refuse my neighbours financial services. They've also said that they won't accept my cash there either, and I will have to buy special pound tokens which I can buy at the reception (for a similar amount, less commission charges).
My neighbour also states he has the right to cut my monthly allowance as he sees fit, and can deduct additional costs from my budget if I decide I need to visit the doctor (or want my bins emptied).
My neighbour has also stated that I need to contribute towards him getting away for regular breaks to his favourite city, and I've also got to chip in for the drinks tab for his posh friends that have booked a couple of rooms in the same hotel.
I have to say that I am quite sceptical of his offer, and how it is actually going to improve my life and my finances, but he is adamant that we will be Better Together.
Is it possible he might be telling lies?



Click to expand...

If he's never been in control then how do you know he'll do a good job, maybe he just talks a good game and can't bring any hard guarantee's of what he can offer you 

You should say "NO thanks"


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			My neighbour has just popped round and informed me that the state of my finances is very worrying and that I should let him take control.
Apparently I don't have the knowledge or the resources to properly manage my affairs, so he is going to take full control of my income and give me back a monthly allowance (obviously less whatever expenses he incurs to provide this service for me).
My home, car, etc. will also become the property of my neighbour, although I will still have full use of them for the time being (providing I continue to pay the mortgage, loans, taxes, etc., and an administration fee obviously).
He has also said that if I don't do it then I won't be able to remain a member of the local social club, apparently there's a Spanish committee member that says that the club won't allow any members in that refuse my neighbours financial services. They've also said that they won't accept my cash there either, and I will have to buy special pound tokens which I can buy at the reception (for a similar amount, less commission charges).
My neighbour also states he has the right to cut my monthly allowance as he sees fit, and can deduct additional costs from my budget if I decide I need to visit the doctor (or want my bins emptied).
My neighbour has also stated that I need to contribute towards him getting away for regular breaks to his favourite city, and I've also got to chip in for the drinks tab for his posh friends that have booked a couple of rooms in the same hotel.
I have to say that I am quite sceptical of his offer, and how it is actually going to improve my life and my finances, but he is adamant that we will be Better Together.
Is it possible he might be telling lies?



Click to expand...

If I were you I would keep friendly with the neighbour on the other side of the road who keeps putting money in your bank account so you can afford some of those little extras that you would never afford yourself and neither can he.   He also helps keeps a watch over your household so you can sleep safer at night.  I hear he has also managed to keep your Social club membership intact even though he's not so keen on the unelected committee and  he has even told the new president what he thinks of him.  It would be quite disingenuous to dump him for this other bloke!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 27, 2014)

Some interesting replies.

To surmise, Scotland couldn't afford to be independent, our homes wouldn't be safe if we vote yes and Alex Salmond is a big fat liar whereas whatever Cameron/Carmichael/Milliband/Darling/Osbourne tells us re: Indy is cast iron fact?

Does that about cover the opinion of the previous few posts?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Some interesting replies.

To surmise, Scotland couldn't afford to be independent, our homes wouldn't be safe if we vote yes and Alex Salmond is a big fat liar whereas whatever Cameron/Carmichael/Milliband/Darling/Osbourne tells us re: Indy is cast iron fact?

Does that about cover the opinion of the previous few posts?
		
Click to expand...

Hey don't forget mine..... the English go on about 1966 a lot!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 27, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Hey don't forget mine..... the English go on about 1966 a lot!
		
Click to expand...

I'll be honest here, I never really understood what you were going on about!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'll be honest here, I never really understood what you were going on about!
		
Click to expand...

 I need a holiday.....


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'll be honest here, I never really understood what you were going on about!
		
Click to expand...

Hope this helps
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx3AecF3ImI


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 27, 2014)

That can't be right, that video/film is in colour.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That can't be right, that video/film is in colour.
		
Click to expand...

Aye, but did the baw cross the line in that one?


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That can't be right, that video/film is in colour.
		
Click to expand...

'Twas remade in colour and the ball always crosses the line.


----------



## c1973 (Jun 27, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			'Twas remade in colour and* the ball always crosses the line*.
		
Click to expand...

Aye maybe in the remake it does. Not just the colour that was doctored then.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 27, 2014)

&#1084;&#1103;&#1095; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1077;&#1089;&#1077;&#1082; &#1083;&#1080;&#1085;&#1080;&#1102;
myach peresek liniyu


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 27, 2014)

Perhaps for the next world cup we should enter a better together team.

Gareth Bale and Scot Broon should add a bit of class.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jun 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Perhaps for the next world cup we should enter a better together team.

Gareth Bale and *Scot Broon* should add a bit of class.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## c1973 (Jun 27, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			&#1084;&#1103;&#1095; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1077;&#1089;&#1077;&#1082; &#1083;&#1080;&#1085;&#1080;&#1102;
myach peresek liniyu
		
Click to expand...

Naw it didnae.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 28, 2014)

I see Cameron was stitched up like a turkey in Europe. Only one other country supporting his proposals.
On top of the Coulson affair I think the man is rapidly turning into a liability for the UK Government.


----------



## 2blue (Jun 28, 2014)

:thup::thup:



Doon frae Troon said:



			I see Cameron was stitched up like a turkey in Europe. Only one other country supporting his proposals.
On top of the Coulson affair I think the man is rapidly turning into a liability for the UK Government.
		
Click to expand...

Please, Oh please.....  don't vote YES & leave us with him & Tory Governments forever.....   or just as bad, UKIP....  the prospect of losing your Labour vote is scary for the North of England


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I see Cameron was stitched up like a turkey in Europe. Only one other country supporting his proposals.
On top of the Coulson affair I think the man is rapidly turning into a liability for the UK Government.
		
Click to expand...

He was representing the best interests of his country in Europe.  More than the majority of Euro cretins were doing, they were just sticking two fingers up to the rising discontent among the people over the way it is being run.


----------



## 2blue (Jun 28, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			He was representing the best interests of his country in Europe.  More than the majority of Euro cretins were doing, they were just sticking two fingers up to the rising discontent among the people over the way it is being run.
		
Click to expand...

So let's threaten to take our ball home.....  that'll teach em......   what a simple Pratt he is....   can't see him lasting much longer....   the worry is there are even greater Tory plonkers waiting to take over.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 28, 2014)

2blue said:



			So let's threaten to take our ball home.....  that'll teach em......   what a simple Pratt he is....   can't see him lasting much longer....   the worry is there are even greater Tory plonkers waiting to take over.
		
Click to expand...

 I dont think he had a ball to take home, he was representing the majority of people in his country which is more than most were. Dont you want a reformed relationship with Europe then, are you content with the way its plodding along the road to become another USSR, and we all know how that ended.

So whats better?   Labour :rofl:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 28, 2014)

That's what I was reminded of..........the posh kid who owns the only football threatening to go home if they don't let him win.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That's what I was reminded of..........the posh kid who owns the only football threatening to go home if they don't let him win.
		
Click to expand...

What football is that then?


----------



## 2blue (Jun 28, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			What football is that then?
		
Click to expand...

Oh dear, for heavens sake, let me explain. We would all love to have a renegotiated position but that will not happen if you take your ball home ie. leave. Just making that threat is quite harmful to EUs position.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 28, 2014)

2blue said:



			Oh dear, for heavens sake, let me explain. We would all love to have a renegotiated position but that will not happen if you take your ball home ie. leave. Just making that threat is quite harmful to EUs position.
		
Click to expand...

The person with the ball is Merkel, Cameron has nothing to take away.    Should he have cow towed down to the Eurocrats and accepted that a past it, drunk who was tossed out of his own tinpot Parliament is suitable to preside over the superstate.   You seem to prefer to use childish insulting comments to anyone with a differing opinion, placing you exactly into the persona you accuse him of.  Personally I am proud our leader stood up against them and wont insult you if you differ in opinion.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 28, 2014)

Sounds like a few on here didn't have a clue about what this Presidential election was about or how he was selected. Head in sand and crack on.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 28, 2014)

2blue said:



			So let's threaten to take our ball home.....  that'll teach em......   what a simple Pratt he is....   can't see him lasting much longer....   the worry is there are even greater Tory plonkers waiting to take over.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah we would be so much better off with Labour.

After all we would not have to do anything, their leader does not think the electorate could be trusted with a referendum.

Patronising p*****k.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 28, 2014)

Fighting a battle that you have no chance whatsoever of winning does not show great leadership qualities IMHO.

Once again UK policy is being driven by the South of England.
Salmond must be laughing his socks off.


----------



## Rumpokid (Jun 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I see Cameron was stitched up like a turkey in Europe. Only one other country supporting his proposals.
On top of the Coulson affair I think the man is rapidly turning into a liability for the UK Government.
		
Click to expand...

Caalm down ehh..You'll soon have your McOwn....FTR.He was stitched up...


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Fighting a battle that you have no chance whatsoever of winning does not show great leadership qualities IMHO.

Once again UK policy is being driven by the South of England.
Salmond must be laughing his socks off.
		
Click to expand...

I thought you, at least, would appreciate someone standing by their principles.

Would you be happier if, like his predecessors, Brown and Blair the PM just caved in to Brussels. What chance would any Government have of renegotiation if the Federalists in Europe knew we would never rock the boat.

It is not the South of England dictating policy, just look at the results of the recent Euro elections throughout GB. There is no real support for either increased influence from Brussels or,even, maintaining the status quo.

As for Salmond laughing his socks off. So what, he certainly does not appear to be making the breakthrough needed. 

BTW before you jump to conclusions I am neither a Tory or UKIPper, merely a firm believer in democracy.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Fighting a battle that you have no chance whatsoever of winning does not show great leadership qualities IMHO.
		
Click to expand...

Just as well Churchill didn't take that advice.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 29, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			BTW before you jump to conclusions I am neither a Tory or UKIPper, merely a firm believer in democracy.
		
Click to expand...

Glad to hear that, so what are your views on a Tory UK government taking us out of Europe against the wishes of the Scots nation that has one Tory MP.


----------



## Hobbit (Jun 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Glad to hear that, so what are your views on a Tory UK government taking us out of Europe against the wishes of the Scots nation that has one Tory MP.
		
Click to expand...

Playing Devil's advocate, what's your views of Scotland dictating that the UK stays in Europe? Surely, as part of a Union you'd respect the democracy of that Union?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 29, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Playing Devil's advocate, what's your views of Scotland dictating that the UK stays in Europe? Surely, as part of a Union you'd respect the democracy of that Union?
		
Click to expand...

We could never dictate as our population is much smaller.
rUk hold all the cards when it comes to UK policy.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Glad to hear that, so what are your views on a Tory UK government taking us out of Europe against the wishes of the Scots nation that has one Tory MP.
		
Click to expand...


No Tory government will take the UK out of Europe willingly...


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Glad to hear that, so what are your views on a Tory UK government taking us out of Europe against the wishes of the Scots nation that has one Tory MP.
		
Click to expand...

I would imagine they are about the same as yours on the times when Scotland has determined that England and the rest of the UK would have a Labour Government despite the majority of voters in those other parts of the UK deciding otherwise.

Democracy has its downs as well as its ups and it seems some can accept that better than others.

By the way where has the Tory party said they intend to take the UK out of Europe?


----------



## c1973 (Jun 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Glad to hear that, so what are your views on a Tory UK government taking us out of Europe against the wishes of the Scots nation that has one Tory MP.
		
Click to expand...


How do we know the Scots nation want to stay in Europe? 

Don't get me wrong, I do. I'm just going to have some Danish bacon and German sausages for brekkie......I'm not voting to give up access to those particular treats.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 29, 2014)

c1973 said:



			How do we know the Scots nation want to stay in Europe? 

Don't get me wrong, I do. I'm just going to have some Danish bacon and German sausages for brekkie......I'm not voting to give up access to those particular treats. 

Click to expand...

You could still have all those things if we left.  Europe could not afford to stop trade with the UK and would also lose out if they put up trade barriers.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Glad to hear that, so what are your views on a Tory UK government taking us out of Europe against the wishes of the Scots nation that has one Tory MP.
		
Click to expand...

Your not going to have to worry about that because if the Yes vote win your out anyway.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 29, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Your not going to have to worry about that because if the Yes vote win your out anyway.
		
Click to expand...

How do you know that?


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			How do you know that?
		
Click to expand...

The man from the Euro quango said so the bully.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 29, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			The man from the Euro quango said so the bully.
		
Click to expand...

The correct answer is....... nobody knows.

Anyway I think this was covered around post 1400


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The correct answer is....... nobody knows.

Anyway I think this was covered around post 1400
		
Click to expand...

And you know the Tory Government is taking us out of Europe.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The correct answer is....... nobody knows.

Anyway I think this was covered around post 1400
		
Click to expand...

That's got to be a first, you worrying about answers being correct.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 29, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			That's got to be a first, you worrying about answers being correct.
		
Click to expand...

Have a like.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 29, 2014)

Oh I think it is about honours even this trip!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 29, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			And you know the Tory Government is taking us out of Europe.
		
Click to expand...

Not so much the Tory Government, more the Tory party.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not so much the Tory Government, more the Tory party.
		
Click to expand...

I take it then that anyone that votes against the EU, if infact there is ever a vote, are all Torys then.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Oh I think it is about honours even this trip!
		
Click to expand...

So what sweeping assumptions or incorrect statements have I made to equate with your claim regarding a Tory UK government.

Yet again you weaken your case.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 29, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			And you know the Tory Government is taking us out of Europe.
		
Click to expand...

Wrong!   Europe is taking us out of Europe.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 29, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Wrong!   Europe is taking us out of Europe.
		
Click to expand...

More likely the correct answer.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 29, 2014)

Interesting to see that the CBI were quite critical of Cameron's efforts in Europe.
I wonder why?


----------



## Hobbit (Jun 29, 2014)

Nice to see Cameron listening to the electorate, and taking heed of the results in the recent Euro elections - unlike most politicians in Europe. 

Cameron should be listening to the people, not the CBI.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Interesting to see that the CBI were quite critical of Cameron's efforts in Europe.
I wonder why?
		
Click to expand...

CBI arnt to crazy about Scottish Independance either so I'm not sure of your point.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 29, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Wrong!   Europe is taking us out of Europe.
		
Click to expand...

Similarly I've heard it said England has moved away from Scotland politically - and so it is England that has changed and England that is risking taking Scotland out of the UK.  Heard it said.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 29, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Nice to see Cameron listening to the electorate, and taking heed of the results in the recent Euro elections - unlike most politicians in Europe. 

Cameron should be listening to the people, not the CBI.
		
Click to expand...

If Cameron had a position of principle on Europe he'd be telling us that he will be campaigning for UK to stay in the EU and telling us the circumstances that would cause him to do otherwise.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 29, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			If Cameron had a position of principle on Europe he'd be telling us that he will be campaigning for UK to stay in the EU and telling us the circumstances that would cause him to do otherwise.
		
Click to expand...

From many of your previous posts it has become clear that you, like your compatriot DfT, are selective in what you choose to hear.

On Saturday morning the PM made his intention clear to campaign in favour of remaining within Europe subject to successful renegotiation of the current terms.

The only UK political leader that, therefore, seems devoid of principle on this issue is Mr Milliband. We all know the positions of Messrs Farage and Clegg but the Leader of the Opposition is clearly trapped between his personal pro-federal view and his realisation that this sits uneasily with the majority of the electorate.

As for Salmond, well it doesn't really matter since the EU have suggested that Scotland could be excluded in the event of aYes vote.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Similarly I've heard it said England has moved away from Scotland politically - and so it is England that has changed and England that is risking taking Scotland out of the UK.  Heard it said.
		
Click to expand...

Where?  Down the pub!

Who is this 'England' of which you speak?   Is it a majority consensus from some poll that I must have missed, is it your own gut feeling, is it a reported perception by Mr Salmond, maybe some editorial in the Guardian.   Or as I suggest, something someone said down the pub.


----------



## Hobbit (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Similarly I've heard it said England has moved away from Scotland politically - and so it is England that has changed and England that is risking taking Scotland out of the UK.  Heard it said.
		
Click to expand...

I've heard it said that Martians are living on the dark side of the moon. 

Both the above comments are as rare as rocking horse poo, and have little basis in fact.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			As for Salmond, well it doesn't really matter since the EU have suggested that Scotland could be excluded in the event of aYes vote.
		
Click to expand...

'Suggested' and 'could' by one guy.............and I am accused by you of being selective in my quotes.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 30, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Where?  Down the pub!

Who is this 'England' of which you speak?   Is it a majority consensus from some poll that I must have missed, is it your own gut feeling, is it a reported perception by Mr Salmond, maybe some editorial in the Guardian.   Or as I suggest, something someone said down the pub.
		
Click to expand...

A view that has been expressed that suggests why many Scots feel as they do about remaining in the UK (or leaving it) is that whereas in the past the views of Scots and rUK were pretty much aligned - that is no longer the case.  And it is not that the views of Scots have changed - it is that the views of rUK have moved to the right - and away from those of Scotland.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			From many of your previous posts it has become clear that you, like your compatriot DfT, are selective in what you choose to hear.

On Saturday morning the PM made his intention clear to campaign in favour of remaining within Europe subject to successful renegotiation of the current terms.

The only UK political leader that, therefore, seems devoid of principle on this issue is Mr Milliband. We all know the positions of Messrs Farage and Clegg but the Leader of the Opposition is clearly trapped between his personal pro-federal view and his realisation that this sits uneasily with the majority of the electorate.

As for Salmond, well it doesn't really matter since the EU have suggested that Scotland could be excluded in the event of aYes vote.
		
Click to expand...

If Cameron is in principle pro-Europe and against leaving he should make that very clear.  Instead he panders to the euro-sceptics in his party and support base by suggesting that he'd be happy taking UK out of Europe.  

And in the context of the independence referendum it is surely better for BT that Cameron does the former.  Suggesting UK would leave Europe and he'd be happy with that I don't think helps BT that much.  I appreciate he has a problem with that though.  Polls and YES suggest Scots would rather stay in Europe; polls suggest many rUK Tory politicians, voters and others would prefer to leave Europe.  And re-election of a Tory Westminster government requires Cameron to be seen and heard to be listening to and 'reflecting the views' of that latter constituency.  A problem for him.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			'Suggested' and 'could' by one guy.............and I am accused by you of being selective in my quotes.
		
Click to expand...

Yes but that one guy, Senor Barolo, carries rather more weight in these discussions than your friend Mr Salmond.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			A view that has been expressed that suggests why many Scots feel as they do about remaining in the UK (or leaving it) is that whereas in the past the views of Scots and rUK were pretty much aligned - that is no longer the case.  And it is not that the views of Scots have changed - it is that the views of rUK have moved to the right - and away from those of Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Yet again you fail to answer questions put to you.

Where has it been stated, never mind proved, that there is some political gap between England (not Surrey) and Scotland.

On the point of the PM's stance on Europe you really should stop attributing statements to him that he has not made. Leave that to The Guardian.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Yet again you fail to answer questions put to you.

Where has it been stated, never mind proved, that there is some political gap between England (not Surrey) and Scotland.

On the point of the PM's stance on Europe you really should stop attributing statements to him that he has not made. Leave that to The Guardian.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that anyone of any particular note has said this and I may not myself believe it.  But I have heard it said by some as a reason for them voting YES. Tell them that they are mistaken - but that's what they believe.  If you don't believe anyone thinks this then again - OK.  

And on Cameron - yes - I'd much rather he made absolutely clear what his principled position on Europe was rather than having to suspect that what he says is aimed at any particular constituency of voter but isn't actually what he believes.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jun 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Where has it been stated, never mind proved, that there is some political gap between England (not Surrey) and Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Is this a trick question? See below for a link to a map from the 2010 GE.See if you can spot the difference, it's quite easy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/

Then consider the recent UKIP success at the European elections to again reflect the differing political climate north/south of the border.


----------



## Val (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Similarly I've heard it said England has moved away from Scotland politically - and so it is England that has changed and England that is risking taking Scotland out of the UK.  Heard it said.
		
Click to expand...

That is the biggest pile of nonsense you've posted on this thread to date, politically England as a nation doesn't exist as it doesn't have a devolved parliament covering English only matters.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 30, 2014)

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/danny-alexander-slams-alex-salmonds-3786303.

Well this makes interesting reading.

That would the the 'dead parrot' pound that according the Osborne, Capt.Darling and the treasury minister was never going to be an option.
Silly Boy


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 30, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Is this a trick question? See below for a link to a map from the 2010 GE.See if you can spot the difference, it's quite easy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/

Then consider the recent UKIP success at the European elections to again reflect the differing political climate north/south of the border.
		
Click to expand...

At the 2010 GE approx 61% of Scottish electorate voted for centre-left parties (Lib-Dem & Labour) and in England the figure was 52%. Not exactly a massive gap.

There were similar regional differences throughout England.

At the recent Euro election did not UKIP secured 10% of the vote in Scotland from a virtual "standing start". Again not that much of a difference when you compare the level of their campaign North & South of the border.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			it is that the views of rUK have moved to the right
		
Click to expand...


Historically folk turn to the right [politically] when they feel under threat... Once the 'threat' [perceived or real] dissipates they turn back to the centre...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			At the 2010 GE approx 61% of Scottish electorate voted for centre-left parties (Lib-Dem & Labour) and in England the figure was 52%. Not exactly a massive gap.

There were similar regional differences throughout England.

At the recent Euro election did not UKIP secured 10% of the vote in Scotland from a virtual "standing start". Again not that much of a difference when you compare the level of their campaign North & South of the border.
		
Click to expand...

I think I would also add the SNP vote to the centre left votes. Kind of changes the perspective a bit.


----------



## Val (Jun 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/danny-alexander-slams-alex-salmonds-3786303.

Well this makes interesting reading.

That would the the 'dead parrot' pound that according the Osborne, Capt.Darling and the treasury minister was never going to be an option.
Silly Boy
		
Click to expand...

Dunno what you are getting at here. Have you read and digested this story? This time it looks like the treasury have it spot on regarding what John Swinneys financial plans for Independent Scotland.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 30, 2014)

Valentino said:



			That is the biggest pile of nonsense you've posted on this thread to date, politically England as a nation doesn't exist as it doesn't have a devolved parliament covering English only matters.
		
Click to expand...

Politically England as a nation exists by it's representation in Westminster.  That representation may not reflect the views of the country of England as a whole - but that is representative democracy for you.  If what is decided and enacted by the Westminster parliament today is to the right of what would have been enacted by it 30yrs ago then Westminster has moved to the right.  If Scotland has not changed it's political stance over these years then England can be described in these specific terms having moved to the right and way from Scotland.

And it is not me saying this - this is what I have heard said and read by some who will vote YES and indeed some who will vote NO.

So tell them they are wrong if you wish and try and convince them otherwise if you want - but don't tell me I am wrong for reporting what I have heard said.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Politically England as a nation exists by it's representation in Westminster.  That representation may not reflect the views of the country of England as a whole - but that is representative democracy for you.  If what is decided and enacted by the Westminster parliament today is to the right of what would have been enacted by it 30yrs ago then Westminster has moved to the right.  If Scotland has not changed it's political stance over these years then England can be described in these specific terms having moved to the right and way from Scotland.

And it is not me saying this - this is what I have heard said and read by some who will vote YES and indeed some who will vote NO.

So tell them they are wrong if you wish and try and convince them otherwise if you want - but don't tell me I am wrong for reporting what I have heard said.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately SILH, I think the issue people are having is bringing in to a fairly decent debate, the viewpoint of "something you've heard". I've heard people blame every big weather event (such as a hurricane, or flood) on a big machine the Americans have in place at the North Pole. They were deadly serious. Despite this, i wouldn't bring this into a serious debate about the global weather.

As such, if you're introducing such viewpoints, then it stands to reason you believe them to be sensible viewpoints held by a large amount of people, whereas it does seem to be only you that have heard these opinions stated. (IMHO, not trying to be confrontational)


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 30, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Historically folk turn to the right [politically] when they feel under threat... Once the 'threat' [perceived or real] dissipates they turn back to the centre...
		
Click to expand...

Probably a generation thing rather than 'historically'

That was why my father was a staunch Unionist [Scots Tory] all his life.
He blamed the start WW2 on Labour's defense policy.


----------



## Val (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Politically England as a nation exists by it's representation in Westminster.  That representation may not reflect the views of the country of England as a whole - but that is representative democracy for you.  If what is decided and enacted by the Westminster parliament today is to the right of what would have been enacted by it 30yrs ago then Westminster has moved to the right.  If Scotland has not changed it's political stance over these years then England can be described in these specific terms having moved to the right and way from Scotland.

*And it is not me saying this* - this is what I have heard said and read by some who will vote YES and indeed some who will vote NO.

So tell them they are wrong if you wish and try and convince them otherwise if you want - but don't tell me I am wrong for reporting what I have heard said.
		
Click to expand...

This is your response almost every time you're posts are questioned, like a taxi driver saying he heard Fulham are signing Messi.

Answer me this, how can England move away from Scotland politically when they have no devolved powers?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think I would also add the SNP vote to the centre left votes. Kind of changes the perspective a bit.
		
Click to expand...

The SNP have a history of attempting to be all things to all men in order to secure their stated aim.

However, I find myself wondering whether you are pro-independence or merely anti-Tory as you scoff at your late father's suggestion that the Labour party were in anyway responsible for the outbreak of WW II.

Many students of the period have similar views that their pro-appeasement, pro-disarmament views led many, including Hitler, to assume that there was no stomach for a war in the UK at that time.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			The SNP have a history of attempting to be all things to all men in order to secure their stated aim.

However, I find myself wondering whether you are pro-independence or merely anti-Tory as you scoff at your late father's suggestion that the Labour party were in anyway responsible for the outbreak of WW II.

Many students of the period have similar views that their pro-appeasement, pro-disarmament views led many, including Hitler, to assume that there was no stomach for a war in the UK at that time.
		
Click to expand...

I beg you pardon......scoff at my late fathers view, whatever made you jump to that conclusion.
I tended to agree with him on that one.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jun 30, 2014)

Valentino said:



			T

Answer me this, how can England move away from Scotland politically when they have no devolved powers?
		
Click to expand...

Quite easily? If the general political consensus of the voters in England moves to the right, then you could say "England has moved away from Scotland politically". I don't think that it requires England to have a devolved government to judge this. I'm not arguing that this *has* happened, just that the above is how I see that phrase could be correct


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I beg you pardon......scoff at my late fathers view, whatever made you jump to that conclusion.
I tended to agree with him on that one.
		
Click to expand...

My apologies.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			My apologies.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks, accepted.


----------



## Val (Jun 30, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Quite easily? If the general political consensus of the voters in England moves to the right, then you could say "England has moved away from Scotland politically". I don't think that it requires England to have a devolved government to judge this. I'm not arguing that this *has* happened, just that the above is how I see that phrase could be correct
		
Click to expand...

Ok, I see your thinking but my reading of SILH suggested a physical move ie differing policies in both countries which cannot happen unless the devolved Scottish parliament want to and if the have the appropriate powers, not vice versa


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Thanks, accepted.
		
Click to expand...

It appears that we are of similar vintage and, thus, so were our fathers. My dear old fella' thought the same as your father and having researched it over the years I would have to, in part at least, agree with them.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			It appears that we are of similar vintage and, thus, so were our fathers. My dear old fella' thought the same as your father and having researched it over the years I would have to, in part at least, agree with them.
		
Click to expand...

Shows how things have changed. Since the 1970's the Torys have been the major influence and responsible for the massive reduction of the armed forces.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 30, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			It appears that we are of similar vintage and, thus, so were our fathers. My dear old fella' thought the same as your father and having researched it over the years I would have to, in part at least, agree with them.
		
Click to expand...

I can remember my dad saying, 'they went to war with four warplanes'.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Shows how things have changed. Since the 1970's the Torys have been the major influence and responsible for the massive reduction of the armed forces.
		
Click to expand...

I think it is what is known as the"peace dividend", and you know how the Tories love a dividend.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 30, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Quite easily? If the general political consensus of the voters in England moves to the right, then you could say "England has moved away from Scotland politically". I don't think that it requires England to have a devolved government to judge this. I'm not arguing that this *has* happened, just that the above is how I see that phrase could be correct
		
Click to expand...

That's how I understand what's being said.

And anyway why can I not raise a point of view that may not be mine?  Do I have to believe in everything I post


----------



## Val (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			That's how I understand what's being said.

And anyway why can I not raise a point of view that may not be mine?  Do I have to believe in everything I post 

Click to expand...

In the interest of debate, if you don't believe it how can you debate it objectively?

Should add though, it appears all your views recently have been other peoples thoughts.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And anyway why can I not raise a point of view that may not be mine?  Do I have to believe in everything I post 

Click to expand...

Yes.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jun 30, 2014)

Valentino said:



			In the interest of debate, if you don't believe it how can you debate it objectively?

Should add though, it appears all your views recently have been other peoples thoughts.
		
Click to expand...

I listen to and read a lot about the referendum - but as I live in England and have done so for a long time I can't really say whether or not I believe it.  I am an outsider looking in.  I can't tell you how I'd really feel on many issues associated with the referendum if I had a vote - because I don't.  The truth is that as much as anything I'm looking to see how those who do have a vote feel on these things to help me understand better - so your responses are (believe it or not) welcome and informative for me.

Though on the 'England moving away from Scotland' suggestion - I can understand that one as I do not like the direction politics and socio-economic views held by the majority is going in England (on unemployment, NHS, benefits, immigration, Europe etc).  I can't tell whether the same is happening in Scotland but from what I read it isn't to the same extent so simply on that basis I'd say the gap is widening.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Though on the 'England moving away from Scotland' suggestion - I can understand that one as I do not like the direction politics and socio-economic views held by the majority is going in England (on unemployment, NHS, benefits, immigration, Europe etc).  I can't tell whether the same is happening in Scotland but from what I read it isn't to the same extent so simply on that basis I'd say the gap is widening.
		
Click to expand...

Can't quite work out where you are getting your assessment of the feeling of the English public. Have you travelled the country extensively speaking to a large cross section of the electorate or have you had a chat with a few chums at Farnham.

On the overall scale of twaddle this seems to be a new high.


----------



## Old Skier (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I do not like the direction politics and socio-economic views held by the majority is going in England (on unemployment, NHS, benefits, immigration, Europe etc).  I can't tell whether the same is happening in Scotland but from what I read it isn't to the same extent so simply on that basis I'd say the gap is widening.
		
Click to expand...

That's because so many Scots appear to have moved south of the border and are insisting that their MPs take on their scio-economic views.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jun 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			That's because so many Scots appear to have moved south of the border and are insisting that their MPs take on their scio-economic views.
		
Click to expand...

Probably more to do with the influx of Eastern Europeans.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jun 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Probably more to do with the influx of Eastern Europeans.
		
Click to expand...

That was what I thought when I was last in Edinburgh.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jun 30, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I listen to and read a lot about the referendum - but as I live in England and have done so for a long time I can't really say whether or not I believe it.  I am an outsider looking in.  I can't tell you how I'd really feel on many issues associated with the referendum if I had a vote - because I don't.  The truth is that as much as anything I'm looking to see how those who do have a vote feel on these things to help me understand better - so your responses are (believe it or not) welcome and informative for me.

Though on the 'England moving away from Scotland' suggestion - I can understand that one as I do not like the direction politics and socio-economic views held by the majority is going in England (on unemployment, NHS, benefits, immigration, Europe etc).  I can't tell whether the same is happening in Scotland but from what I read it isn't to the same extent so simply on that basis I'd say the gap is widening.
		
Click to expand...

That can be fixed.  We can send our unemployed, Benefit scroungers, immigrants, etc up to Scotland.  Would that make them feel more comfortable?

Seriously though, you must be aware of the state of the economy, that we are massively in debt with crippling interest rates to  fund the welfare feeding frenzy the country embarked on without the wealth to fund it. You cannot be so naive not to see that the country is expanding at a rate where the infrastructure to support it is unaffordable, that we have been spending far too much on a bloated public sector where we cannot fund the massive black hole in the resultant pension funds.  UKIP made massive gains in the UK and also in Scotland which is a reflection of the way people north and south of the border feel about their lot.   Some bloke down the pub keeps telling me he is sick and tired of it all and it will all end in tears, especially if Labour get in and reverse the good work done so far by the colalition.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 1, 2014)

820,000 Scots living in poverty.
16% of our population
110,000 up on last year.

Just saying.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			820,000 Scots living in poverty.
16% of our population
110,000 up on last year.

Just saying.
		
Click to expand...

So what is this poverty you speak of?   Is it where people are confined to the poor house, are they starving and dressed in rags.   Do the parents give up their mobile phone contracts, Sky TV, cigarettes, booze, cars and holidays to put food on the table for their kids.

Or!  as I suspect it is a form of relative poverty that is someone living on a percentage of the average wage or claiming certain benefits.  I think using data like people using food banks is spurious due to the fact that if you offer free food the people will take it and that would have been true at any time in our history.  I do understand that some people are poor due to such things as mental health issues  but there are also the many cases where for example women have many children by different Fathers and the Fathers pay nothing toward the children's upkeep.   There are also many feckless people who would (as i mentioned previously)  prefer to smoke and drink than feed and clothe the kids.

I think your simple statistic paints no picture of reality.

Just Saying!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 1, 2014)

110,000 up on last year tends to negate your tired old arguments.

More to do with 0% contracts and employers paying the minimum possible wage.
Bedroom tax had little effect on Scotland as the local authorities could see that it was a 'Yes Minister' solution that would cost more long term.


----------



## NWJocko (Jul 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			110,000 up on last year tends to negate your tired old arguments.

More to do with 0% contracts and employers paying the minimum possible wage.
Bedroom tax had little effect on Scotland as the local authorities could see that it was a 'Yes Minister' solution that would cost more long term.
		
Click to expand...

Out of interest do you know the numbers for England?


----------



## c1973 (Jul 1, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			So what is this poverty you speak of?   Is it where people are confined to the poor house, are they starving and dressed in rags.   Do the parents give up their mobile phone contracts, Sky TV, cigarettes, booze, cars and holidays to put food on the table for their kids.

Or!  as I suspect it is a form of relative poverty that is someone living on a percentage of the average wage or claiming certain benefits.  *I think using data like people using food banks is spurious due to the fact that if you offer free food the people will take it and that would have been true at any time in our history*.  I do understand that some people are poor due to such things as mental health issues  but there are also the many cases where for example women have many children by different Fathers and the Fathers pay nothing toward the children's upkeep.   There are also many feckless people who would (as i mentioned previously)  prefer to smoke and drink than feed and clothe the kids.

I think your simple statistic paints no picture of reality.

Just Saying!
		
Click to expand...

Unbelievable. Absolutely unbelievable to me that people think this way.

Would you queue up for food handouts unless you really needed to? I know I wouldn't. Not everybody on the bread line is there due to mental health issues (as you put it). 

More stereotyping in that post than I've had the misfortune to hear in a long time.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 1, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Unbelievable. Absolutely unbelievable to me that people think this way.

Would you queue up for food handouts unless you really needed to? I know I wouldn't. Not everybody on the bread line is there due to mental health issues (as you put it). 

More stereotyping in that post than I've had the misfortune to hear in a long time.
		
Click to expand...

Could have been worse, he failed to mention single mums getting free council houses


----------



## NWJocko (Jul 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			820,000 Scots living in poverty.
16% of our population
110,000 up on last year.

Just saying.
		
Click to expand...

Just looked myself (assuming the same source, going by your numbers I think so).

Are you trying to make the point that Scotland is worse than the rest of the uk?

If so, I guess you missed the c. 22% in England, c.25% in Wales and c 20% in Norn Iron?!

Not sure if you were trying to make out that Scotland was somehow suffering more than the rest of the UK though?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 1, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Just looked myself (assuming the same source, going by your numbers I think so).

Are you trying to make the point that Scotland is worse than the rest of the uk?

If so, I guess you missed the c. 22% in England, c.25% in Wales and c 20% in Norn Iron?!

Not sure if you were trying to make out that Scotland was somehow suffering more than the rest of the UK though?
		
Click to expand...

I was only concerned about Scotland as I am unhappy that the gap between rich and poor seems to be widening rapidly.
Scotland's figures are quite disgraceful.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I was only concerned about Scotland as I am unhappy that the gap between rich and poor seems to be widening rapidly.Scotland's figures are quite disgraceful.
		
Click to expand...

In other words you didn't bother reading the figures in full.Half the story seems to be the norm with the Yes campaign.


----------



## NWJocko (Jul 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I was only concerned about Scotland as I am unhappy that the gap between rich and poor seems to be widening rapidly.
Scotland's figures are quite disgraceful.
		
Click to expand...

ALL of the figures are disgraceful. And, to be fair, Scotland's are actually better than other areas in the UK.

How does Salmond propose to narrow the gap and provide a more equal distribution of wealth? He isn't really a staunch socialist is he (although I accept many Scots are, more so than the SNP at least).


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 1, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			In other words you didn't bother reading the figures in full.Half the story seems to be the norm with the Yes campaign.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry to bust your bubble but I got the figures from BBC Scotland text. As it was a Scottish service they did not show the figures from rUK.

I would imagine that rUK figures have been skewed by the bedroom tax. It seems to have put a lot of poor people into greater debt.


----------



## Val (Jul 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I was only concerned about Scotland as I am unhappy that the gap between rich and poor seems to be widening rapidly.
Scotland's figures are quite disgraceful.
		
Click to expand...

It's happening world wide not just the UK, non story as normal


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 1, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Unbelievable. Absolutely unbelievable to me that people think this way.

Would you queue up for food handouts unless you really needed to? I know I wouldn't. Not everybody on the bread line is there due to mental health issues (as you put it). 

More stereotyping in that post than I've had the misfortune to hear in a long time.
		
Click to expand...

I didnt say everyone on the breadline has mental health issues.   Did I?

You and I may not queue up for food handouts but it would be rather naive to think some dont take advantage of them. I think its unbelievable that people cant see that there is a fair amount of abuse with welfare systems.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Could have been worse, he failed to mention single mums getting free council houses
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reminder.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 2, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			How does Salmond propose to narrow the gap and provide a more equal distribution of wealth? He isn't really a staunch socialist is he (although I accept many Scots are, more so than the SNP at least).
		
Click to expand...

Who cares about Salmond?That's very short sighted and a problem that seems to pervade The UK.Independence for me is about shaping a country, not for today or the next couple of years, but for 100's of years going forward.Being a responsible country able to take their own decisions about how to point our society in the direction the majority want to point it in....something, that within the UK with Westminster and the city of London being the be all and end all ( no matter what Osbourne says about HS3 or Milliband about regional assemblies, thats all bollox) is currently not possible

Folk should move on from Salmond, it's been totally played out by unionists as the reason we should vote No.I mean seriously, you expect folk to decide how to vote because of Alex Salmond?


----------



## c1973 (Jul 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Who cares about Salmond?That's very short sighted and a problem that seems to pervade The UK.Independence for me is about shaping a country, not for today or the next couple of years, but for 100's of years going forward.Being a responsible country able to take their own decisions about how to point our society in the direction the majority want to point it in....something, that within the UK with Westminster and the city of London being the be all and end all ( no matter what Osbourne says about HS3 or Milliband about regional assemblies, thats all bollox) is currently not possible

Folk should move on from Salmond, it's been totally played out by unionists as the reason we should vote No.I mean seriously, you expect folk to decide how to vote because of Alex Salmond?
		
Click to expand...


Agree with what you say regards Salmond. It might not have formed part of the debate had he and his SNP cohorts not tried to make it a choice between 'your choice of government or the Torys', obviously the No campaign would flip it back and play off any dislike of Salmonds megalomaniac tendencies in running Scotland. 

Unfortunately that ship has long sailed and people on both sides of the debate will be influenced by short term issues.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 2, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			ALL of the figures are disgraceful. And, to be fair, Scotland's are actually better than other areas in the UK.

How does Salmond propose to narrow the gap and provide a more equal distribution of wealth? He isn't really a staunch socialist is he (although I accept many Scots are, more so than the SNP at least).
		
Click to expand...

Have you thought for a moment that after a Yes vote Salmond may not be leading the majority party in Scotland.
Loads of traditional Labour supporters have switched to the SNP, they may change their minds after independence.


----------



## NWJocko (Jul 2, 2014)

I did realise after posting I shouldn't have put the onus on Salmond as it would, rightly, get this response!

However, the question still stands, how do you think an Independent Scotland will achieve a better wealth distribution and "narrow the gap"?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 2, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Agree with what you say regards Salmond. It might not have formed part of the debate had he and his SNP cohorts not tried to make it a choice between 'your choice of government or the Torys', obviously the No campaign would flip it back and play off any dislike of Salmonds megalomaniac tendencies in running Scotland. 

Unfortunately that ship has long sailed and people on both sides of the debate will be influenced by short term issues.
		
Click to expand...

There is a clear distinction to be drawn between using Alex Salmond and The Conservative party. One man or a Political Party with a clear philosophy. Salmond is tomorrows chippy wrapper, the Conservative Party are not...they'll b around for a long time, and if recent results are to be used as a pointer, they're going further right than centre to reflect the desires of the majoity who vote in England.I'm happy to have a debate about SNP vs Conservative, that's fair enough, but one guy vs a political philosophy is nonsense.

fwiw The SNP is a dead duck if we vote yes.They'll win the first election handsomely then the fighting will start.Scotland will become Nationalists vs Scottish Labour vs Scottish Conservative vs Green vs Socialist ...and only the Green party and Socialist parties will be able to call themselves centre left.



NWJocko said:



			However, the question still stands, how do you think an Independent Scotland will achieve a better wealth distribution and "narrow the gap"?
		
Click to expand...

No matter what anyone says, Scotland will be a prosperous country if we vote yes.Only the daftest would disagree.To what extent is the interesting question.

So we have a pot of money, raised in the traditional way of taxation etc.That won't change.Then the choice is how does the elected lot spend it?Where do we prioritise?We need to build roads, do we make them payage?We need to have some sort of army, how big and how much do we spend on it?

I'm a massive fan of the mondragon way of doing things, with some tweaks to fit in with Scotland.I think 1/3 ownership models are essential to rebuilding Scotland.Govt/private/workers all working together, all with equal shares in the company.Retooling instead of call centre.Small,specialised industries.Simplifying the tax code so it's not 3 foot deep and stopping tax avoidance that has become prevelant in The UK and accepted by Westminster.Want to turn a profit in Scotland?Pay your taxes.If not, see ya later, someone else will.

Scotlands oil will eventually run out...no one really knows when or whether there's another big lot in the clyde basin.But the there is billions of money in decommissioning rigs.Billions.Become a world leader in that field too.Why not?Someone has to and Aberdeen is perfectly placed.Start building social housing on a massive scale, but underpin social housing with jobs specifically for those who live nearby.Offer incentives to companies to build factories beside these houses.

Limit the number of university places each year.Create apprenticeship colleges instead.We don't need 20,000 kids with English Lit degrees, we need kids with skills too.

Now I know alot of folk think the same about England, but lets face it, the priorities for both major parties in England revolve around The City of London, The UN security Council, The Military/Monetary (Gill-Scott Heron) big business,HS2/olympic games vanity projects and the simple truth is that's never going to change, so as much as my heart goes out to those south of Gretna who think the same, the only way you're gonna live in that kind of society is to move to an indy Scotland.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 2, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			I did realise after posting I shouldn't have put the onus on Salmond as it would, rightly, get this response!

However, the question still stands, how do you think an Independent Scotland will achieve a better wealth distribution and "narrow the gap"?
		
Click to expand...

I think the answer was in my question. 
End 0-4 hour contracts and pay a living wage instead of a minimum one.
Probably also look at the tax system but that is a bit beyond my ken.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There is a clear distinction to be drawn between using Alex Salmond and The Conservative party. One man or a Political Party with a clear philosophy. Salmond is tomorrows chippy wrapper, the Conservative Party are not...they'll b around for a long time, and if recent results are to be used as a pointer, they're going further right than centre to reflect the desires of the majoity who vote in England.I'm happy to have a debate about SNP vs Conservative, that's fair enough, but one guy vs a political philosophy is nonsense.

fwiw The SNP is a dead duck if we vote yes.They'll win the first election handsomely then the fighting will start.Scotland will become Nationalists vs Scottish Labour vs Scottish Conservative vs Green vs Socialist ...and only the Green party and Socialist parties will be able to call themselves centre left.



No matter what anyone says, Scotland will be a prosperous country if we vote yes.Only the daftest would disagree.To what extent is the interesting question.

So we have a pot of money, raised in the traditional way of taxation etc.That won't change.Then the choice is how does the elected lot spend it?Where do we prioritise?We need to build roads, do we make them payage?We need to have some sort of army, how big and how much do we spend on it?

I'm a massive fan of the mondragon way of doing things, with some tweaks to fit in with Scotland.I think 1/3 ownership models are essential to rebuilding Scotland.Govt/private/workers all working together, all with equal shares in the company.Retooling instead of call centre.Small,specialised industries.Simplifying the tax code so it's not 3 foot deep and stopping tax avoidance that has become prevelant in The UK and accepted by Westminster.Want to turn a profit in Scotland?Pay your taxes.If not, see ya later, someone else will.

Scotlands oil will eventually run out...no one really knows when or whether there's another big lot in the clyde basin.But the there is billions of money in decommissioning rigs.Billions.Become a world leader in that field too.Why not?Someone has to and Aberdeen is perfectly placed.Start building social housing on a massive scale, but underpin social housing with jobs specifically for those who live nearby.Offer incentives to companies to build factories beside these houses.

Limit the number of university places each year.Create apprenticeship colleges instead.We don't need 20,000 kids with English Lit degrees, we need kids with skills too.

Now I know alot of folk think the same about England, but lets face it, the priorities for both major parties in England revolve around The City of London, The UN security Council, The Military/Monetary (Gill-Scott Heron) big business,HS2/olympic games vanity projects and the simple truth is that's never going to change, so as much as my heart goes out to those south of Gretna who think the same, the only way you're gonna live in that kind of society is to move to an indy Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

The point I was trying to make (not very well tbf) was the No campaign may not have trivialized the debate into a short term 'don't vote for him' if he/they hadn't went down the 'you'll always be run by torys' route first. 

In laymans terms I was kind of saying 'aye, but they started it!'. 

Rightly or wrongly (wrong imo) this debate was always going to get dragged down to a base level, we all knew that (or should have), unfortunately it has also been dragged down to short term thinking too (Yes campaign biggest culprits imo). Mark my words, there are plenty up here who will be swayed by the impending reruns of Braveheart and that's a sorry indicator of how base this debate has become in places. Never underestimate the publics propensity for stupidity!

You'll note that I did say I agreed with what you said about Salmond btw.


----------



## NWJocko (Jul 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There is a clear distinction to be drawn between using Alex Salmond and The Conservative party. One man or a Political Party with a clear philosophy. Salmond is tomorrows chippy wrapper, the Conservative Party are not...they'll b around for a long time, and if recent results are to be used as a pointer, they're going further right than centre to reflect the desires of the majoity who vote in England.I'm happy to have a debate about SNP vs Conservative, that's fair enough, but one guy vs a political philosophy is nonsense.

fwiw The SNP is a dead duck if we vote yes.They'll win the first election handsomely then the fighting will start.Scotland will become Nationalists vs Scottish Labour vs Scottish Conservative vs Green vs Socialist ...and only the Green party and Socialist parties will be able to call themselves centre left.



No matter what anyone says, Scotland will be a prosperous country if we vote yes.Only the daftest would disagree.To what extent is the interesting question.

So we have a pot of money, raised in the traditional way of taxation etc.That won't change.Then the choice is how does the elected lot spend it?Where do we prioritise?We need to build roads, do we make them payage?We need to have some sort of army, how big and how much do we spend on it?

I'm a massive fan of the mondragon way of doing things, with some tweaks to fit in with Scotland.I think 1/3 ownership models are essential to rebuilding Scotland.Govt/private/workers all working together, all with equal shares in the company.Retooling instead of call centre.Small,specialised industries.Simplifying the tax code so it's not 3 foot deep and stopping tax avoidance that has become prevelant in The UK and accepted by Westminster.Want to turn a profit in Scotland?Pay your taxes.If not, see ya later, someone else will.

Scotlands oil will eventually run out...no one really knows when or whether there's another big lot in the clyde basin.But the there is billions of money in decommissioning rigs.Billions.Become a world leader in that field too.Why not?Someone has to and Aberdeen is perfectly placed.Start building social housing on a massive scale, but underpin social housing with jobs specifically for those who live nearby.Offer incentives to companies to build factories beside these houses.

Limit the number of university places each year.Create apprenticeship colleges instead.We don't need 20,000 kids with English Lit degrees, we need kids with skills too.

Now I know alot of folk think the same about England, but lets face it, the priorities for both major parties in England revolve around The City of London, The UN security Council, The Military/Monetary (Gill-Scott Heron) big business,HS2/olympic games vanity projects and the simple truth is that's never going to change, so as much as my heart goes out to those south of Gretna who think the same, the only way you're gonna live in that kind of society is to move to an indy Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Good response, thanks. I'm genuinely interested in how Scotlands "lot" would/could be improved post indpendence, not attempting to argue a Yes point of view.

I just hope that whoever ends up in power can introduce/effect these changes in the event of a Yes.  My perception is that the debate hasn't given e population at large this sort of picture in terms of what the nation could look like after a Yes therefore will there be the push for yes and/or the push from the electorate for these changes in the event of independence? Equally true of the No campaign in terms of lack of direction also, hence the debate being conducted at the most basic levels sadly.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 2, 2014)

Good post Adi.
Thank you for adding so much to this thread. I would imagine you have dispelled more than a few myths about life in Scotland.

I see Lord McConnel of Glenscorrodale has pressed for the idea of an independent Scotland within the UK.
Not sure how that would work.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Now I know alot of folk think the same about England, but lets face it, the priorities for both major parties in England revolve around The City of London, The UN security Council, The Military/Monetary (Gill-Scott Heron) big business,HS2/olympic games vanity projects and the simple truth is that's never going to change, so as much as my heart goes out to those south of Gretna who think the same, the only way you're gonna live in that kind of society is to move to an indy Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Don't tell me that you think that, politically, Westminster (the UK parties) has, to satisfy the demands of a constituency of voters in England, been moving and is continuing to move away from the broad feelings of the Scottish electorate.  Not something I'd dare suggest as I just don't have the evidence to support that view - so whether it is perception or truth I don;t know. However clearly any such perceived move away could be one reason that some see for voting YES.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Good post Adi.
Thank you for adding so much to this thread. I would imagine you have dispelled more than a few myths about life in Scotland.

I see Lord McConnel of Glenscorrodale has pressed for the idea of an independent Scotland within the UK.
Not sure how that would work.
		
Click to expand...

Nae bother, although this is just my opinion based on what I _think_ I know.I could be wrong 

At the end of last year I wrote a letter to Jack McConnell, his minion replied with the opening line that my refusal to refer to him as Lord didn't go down particularily well and that we aren't all Jock Tamsons bairns  and that my request for him ( and Henry McLeish) to come out in favour of Independence wisnae goany happen laddie ( I'm still holding out for Henry to say aye)

Still bends my mind that Labour politicians can find it in their heart to accept peerages...traitors to their party imo.

Anyway, to put some more flesh on what I think could be done on a large scale in Scotland ( but not England)

Mondragon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation

Mittlestand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelstand

The philosophies held within these two strands 'stolen' from the Basques and Germans could be the start of something really quite exciting in Scotland.The perfect opportunity presented itself recently when the guy whos name escapes me threaten to close the whole sheebang @ Grangemouth unless he got his way.The Scottish Govt should have called his bluff, gave him his solitary Â£ back and made it a co-operative, invested govt money in changing it to diesel and sold 1/3 to a private equity company, kept 1/3 and given 1/3 to the workers.

Hesseltine recently admitted to stopping oil/gas drilling in West Scotland to allow nuclear subs safe passage to the North Atlantic.Removal of these wmds and the opening up of those fields safely protects any jobs potentially lost by coulport/faslane and maybe even rosyth losing out on RN ships.Might even increase work forces?

Realise this is far fetched, but it got to be better than the current acceptance of foodbanks and zero hour contracts, Â£130Billion nuclear vanity projects or trains we'll never see in Scotland?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Realise this is far fetched, but it got to be better than the current acceptance of foodbanks and zero hour contracts, Â£130Billion nuclear vanity projects or trains we'll never see in Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

The far-fetched part of your proposition is,sadly, your faith in your fellow man, Scottish or otherwise. Read George Orwell. 

And is the present a good time to be switching a plant to diesel production when demand for that fuel has peaked and, in some areas is now falling.

Workers co-operatives are a fine ideal but in practice the likelihood of government, workers and private equity happily and profitably co-existing is about on a par with the chances of England winning the next World Cup.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Nae bother, although this is just my opinion based on what I _think_ I know.I could be wrong 

At the end of last year I wrote a letter to Jack McConnell, his minion replied with the opening line that my refusal to refer to him as Lord didn't go down particularily well and that we aren't all Jock Tamsons bairns  and that my request for him ( and Henry McLeish) to come out in favour of Independence wisnae goany happen laddie ( I'm still holding out for Henry to say aye)

Still bends my mind that Labour politicians can find it in their heart to accept peerages...traitors to their party imo.

Anyway, to put some more flesh on what I think could be done on a large scale in Scotland ( but not England)

Mondragon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation

Mittlestand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelstand

The philosophies held within these two strands 'stolen' from the Basques and Germans could be the start of something really quite exciting in Scotland.The perfect opportunity presented itself recently when the guy whos name escapes me threaten to close the whole sheebang @ Grangemouth unless he got his way.The Scottish Govt should have called his bluff, gave him his solitary Â£ back and made it a co-operative, invested govt money in changing it to diesel and sold 1/3 to a private equity company, kept 1/3 and given 1/3 to the workers.

Hesseltine recently admitted to stopping oil/gas drilling in West Scotland to allow nuclear subs safe passage to the North Atlantic.Removal of these wmds and the opening up of those fields safely protects any jobs potentially lost by coulport/faslane and maybe even rosyth losing out on RN ships.Might even increase work forces?

Realise this is far fetched, but it got to be better than the current acceptance of foodbanks and zero hour contracts, Â£130Billion nuclear vanity projects or trains we'll never see in Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

Any thoughts on the 'Common Weal' and if could have any place in shaping a future Scotland

http://reidfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/The-Common-Weal.pdf


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Any thoughts on the 'Common Weal' and if could have any place in shaping a future Scotland

http://reidfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/The-Common-Weal.pdf

Click to expand...

I donate money to the jimmy Reid Foundation and the common weal, it's terrific.Growing up in Scotland I was a disciple of Reid.Folk like him,Sillars,Harvie & Margo are at the very heart of who I want directing Scotland.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 2, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			The far-fetched part of your proposition is,sadly, your faith in your fellow man, Scottish or otherwise. Read George Orwell. 

And is the present a good time to be switching a plant to diesel production when demand for that fuel has peaked and, in some areas is now falling.

Workers co-operatives are a fine ideal but in practice the likelihood of government, workers and private equity happily and profitably co-existing is about on a par with the chances of England winning the next World Cup.
		
Click to expand...

Good post.

Workers cooperatives have never been successful and I find it hard to see people/organisations wanting to invest their children's inheritance into such schemes.  If you take a look at world history all attempts to move away from natural market forces always fail.   A typical example of this is the USSR and the next will be the EU.    In credit to China they seem to have realised this and exposed their market to free enterprise.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 2, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Good post.

Workers cooperatives have never been successful and I find it hard to see people/organisations wanting to invest their children's inheritance into such schemes.  If you take a look at world history all attempts to move away from natural market forces always fail.   A typical example of this is the USSR and the next will be the EU.    In credit to China they seem to have realised this and exposed their market to free enterprise.
		
Click to expand...


Are taxpayer (workers) funded government bailouts part of natural market forces? 

If natural market forces had been allowed to take place in this country and others then I would suggest the vast majority of us would be well buggered!


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 2, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Are taxpayer (workers) funded government bailouts part of natural market forces? 

If natural market forces had been allowed to take place in this country and others then I would suggest the vast majority of us would be well buggered!
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. The bank bail outs were a result of the failure of successive governments to adequately regulate the bankers and the realisation that, as you state so eloquently, we would have all been well and truly buggered if they had been left to their natural fate.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 2, 2014)

I remember reading somewhere that under Thatchers reign the UK was observing all of the principles of Karl Marx except state owned banking.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I remember reading somewhere that under Thatchers reign the UK was observing all of the principles of Karl Marx except state owned banking.
		
Click to expand...

The problem pre-dates even Mrs T.

The influence of bankers upon the highest levels of politics existed at least since the 18th Century.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 2, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Good post.

Workers cooperatives have never been successful and I find it hard to see people/organisations wanting to invest their children's inheritance into such schemes.  If you take a look at world history all attempts to move away from natural market forces always fail.   A typical example of this is the USSR and the next will be the EU.    In credit to China they seem to have realised this and exposed their market to free enterprise.
		
Click to expand...

John Lewis/Waitrose works well enough, as does Mondragon per my wiki link further up the page.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			John Lewis/Waitrose works well enough, as does Mondragon per my wiki link further up the page.
		
Click to expand...

And your wiki link also refers to Mondragon exploiting workers. Wouldn't have thought that you, of all people, would want to cite them as a good example.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 2, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			And your wiki link also refers to Mondragon exploiting workers. Wouldn't have thought that you, of all people, would want to cite them as a good example.
		
Click to expand...

Really?I've just skim-read it and can't see any ref to exploitation? I used the wiki link for ease btw, I hadn't read it prior to posting as I was aware of it already...can you point me in the direction of the exploitation please mate?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jul 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Really?I've just skim-read it and can't see any ref to exploitation? I used the wiki link for ease btw, I hadn't read it prior to posting as I was aware of it already...can you point me in the direction of the exploitation please mate?
		
Click to expand...

Quote from Noam Chomsky, in the "reactions" part.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			John Lewis/Waitrose works well enough, as does Mondragon per my wiki link further up the page.
		
Click to expand...

John Lewis/Waitrose is employee  owned due to the beneficiary of John Lewis, it has no public funding and does share profit with its workforce.    It is managed the same way as any other similar company and the employees have no say in who manages them or how they do it.   You would not notice anything different to any other supermarket.

I dont believe it is a parallel  to any other workers cooperative.   As I said earlier, these always fail.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 3, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			And your wiki link also refers to Mondragon exploiting workers. Wouldn't have thought that you, of all people, would want to cite them as a good example.
		
Click to expand...




CheltenhamHacker said:



			Quote from Noam Chomsky, in the "reactions" part.
		
Click to expand...

Don't think I'm equipped to tackle Chomsky on any topic 'cept maybe Hibs! Value his opinion though, especially given his stance on the referendum 

I'm not saying it's a perfect system, but it does show, flaws and all, that there is an alternative to full public or full private ownership.And I'm not looking for things to be ran not for profit,either.And I'd hazard a guess that the worker exploitation levelled at Mondragon is lower than that of say, Unilever or Nike?

I did look about a bit as there was nothing specific NC refers too...

http://www.cooperativeconsult.com/blog/?p=490

I accept that there is no perfect solution, but I think the system offered by the mix of worker/govt/private sector offers the best solution for creating jobs,empowering workers,making money,creating taxation and being fair(er)

I would point out, my idea is based on creating a better working/living environment for those less well off.I don't consider myself to be one of them and know I'm in a fortunate position, relatively speaking.I'd hazard a guess that anyone looking at this thread,during their lunch break or after work is also not part of my target audience.

Independence for Scotland won't change my life, or my lifestyle more to the point, and again, I doubt it would change anyones on here either...those with regular access to the internet and who then make the choice to browse a golf forum are, I'm gonna hazard a guess, on the whole doing OK.I'm keen for those in Possil or Stepps, Niddrie or Pilton to be given the opportunity to be part of something that they currently can't be.Something like Mondragon looks like a good idea.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I donate money to the jimmy Reid Foundation and the common weal, it's terrific.Growing up in Scotland I was a disciple of Reid.Folk like him,Sillars,Harvie & Margo are at the very heart of who I want directing Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

...my father talked in glowing terms of what Jimmy Reid, Jimmy Airlie, Sammy Gilmore and Sammy Barr did around the UCS work-in.  Right or wrong they campaigned very strongly for their colleagues an families.  And Margo - the debate is surely so much less for her absence.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Independence for Scotland won't change my life, or my lifestyle more to the point, and again, I doubt it would change anyones on here either...those with regular access to the internet and who then make the choice to browse a golf forum are, I'm gonna hazard a guess, on the whole doing OK.I'm keen for those in Possil or Stepps, Niddrie or Pilton to be given the opportunity to be part of something that they currently can't be.Something like Mondragon looks like a good idea.
		
Click to expand...

Cannot disagree with your aims and ideals.

But I remain an old Orwellian sceptic on the ability of many of us to live within a Socialist (utopian?) state.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 3, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Cannot disagree with your aims and ideals.

But I remain an old Orwellian sceptic on the ability of many of us to live within a Socialist (utopian?) state.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think many of us wish to live in a socialist utopia.
The Liberals were always strong in Scotland and a country run by David Steel and John Smith would have been a better suit to Thatcher or  Michael Foot.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I don't think many of us wish to live in a socialist utopia.
The Liberals were always strong in Scotland and a country run by David Steel and John Smith would have been a better suit to Thatcher or  Michael Foot.
		
Click to expand...

So we'd be looking at the emergence of a Scottish Liberal Party?  Could be successful.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 3, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Cannot disagree with your aims and ideals.

But I remain an old Orwellian sceptic on the ability of many of us to live within a Socialist (utopian?) state.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not a socialist...I own a company and drive profits as hard and as fairly as I can.I just think there is a better balance available than the current model.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 3, 2014)

Good news for Glasgow.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28129190

Nice to see some investment for a change. We might actually get the airport rail link that Salmond and his cronies pulled the plug on.
Although, never one to miss an opportunity they still manage to talk this investment down. Is it so hard to say this is good news and just leave it at that?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 3, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So we'd be looking at the emergence of a Scottish Liberal Party?  Could be successful.
		
Click to expand...

It is a way out of the dead end where Clegg placed them.
Totally separate Scottish Liberal party, there would be a fair bit of support I think.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 3, 2014)

Liberals tended to do well in the highlands & islands in the past. Not so sure they done that we'll elsewhere, I do stand to be corrected though.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 3, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Good news for Glasgow.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28129190

Nice to see some investment for a change. We might actually get the airport rail link that Salmond and his cronies pulled the plug on.
Although, never one to miss an opportunity they still manage to talk this investment down. Is it so hard to say this is good news and just leave it at that?
		
Click to expand...

For a change?Seriously?..chicken feed over 20 years is ok I suppose.

http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2014/jul/nicola-sturgeon-comments-offer-glasgow


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			For a change?Seriously?..chicken feed over 20 years is ok I suppose.

http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2014/jul/nicola-sturgeon-comments-offer-glasgow

Click to expand...

Not happy then, tell them you don't won't it. People in N Devon would be happy with 1mil a year. No pleasing some I suppose.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			For a change?Seriously?..chicken feed over 20 years is ok I suppose.

http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2014/jul/nicola-sturgeon-comments-offer-glasgow

Click to expand...


Funny they could find 500 mil just like that when they thought they'd be at a political disadvantage but it wasn't there when GARL required the funding though,eh? 

I was actually referring to investment being a change when all we are hearing about is cuts and austerity. Perhaps I wasn't clear on that though.

My jibe at Salmond and his cronies stands (Sturgeon is the worst),  reactionary politics and point scoring, what a way to run a country. How difficult is it to welcome investment without the usual SNP clowns talking it down?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 3, 2014)

Swings and Roundabouts.........Glasgow's gain and Prestwicks loss.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 3, 2014)

I have held off saying this but I think I need to get it off my chest:

I believe much of this drive for Scottish independence is driven by the want to grab the oil revenues.   If there was no oil I doubt very much if the issue would exist.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 4, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			I have held off saying this but I think I need to get it off my chest:

I believe much of this drive for Scottish independence is driven by the want to grab the oil revenues.   If there was no oil I doubt very much if the issue would exist.
		
Click to expand...

mibbes aye, mibbes naw.

dunno why you've held off getting that off your chest, it's not exactly the most revolutionary pov?


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 4, 2014)

I wouldn't put it down to oil. More to do with synicall polititions lust for power during a period when we are unfortunately seeing how easy it is to wind up areas of the public by false promises and the grass is always greener syndrome. The less well off will always be less well off and the rich will always be rich and get richer.

If iscot is going to cure all ills, will we see a mass exodus of Scots from RUK? Life's what you make off it. Becoming Independant will not make the slightest difference to the average Scot IMHO.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 4, 2014)

Nearly half a million English citizens have already made that move to Scotland.
A figure that represents 10% of the Scots population which would equate to six million Scots living in England.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 4, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			If iscot is going to cure all ills, will we see a mass exodus of Scots from RUK? Life's what you make off it. Becoming Independant will not make the slightest difference to the average Scot IMHO.
		
Click to expand...

On which basis you could say that they should get on with looking after themselves so the rest of us don't have to put up with all the whinging about England and the unfairness - blah blah - which is for me one reason I hope they vote YES.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			mibbes aye, mibbes naw.

dunno why you've held off getting that off your chest, it's not exactly the most revolutionary pov?
		
Click to expand...


Because I think the real deep seated drive for independence is greed driven by oil revenues.  Not of the man in the street but by the political elite who see it as a way to increase their power


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 4, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			On which basis you could say that they should get on with looking after themselves so the rest of us don't have to put up with all the whinging about England and the unfairness - blah blah - which is for me one reason I hope they vote YES.
		
Click to expand...

Finally!

An admission rather than the claptrap previously heard about weighing up things.

All that remains now is for similar honesty from your fellow anti- English campaigner, DfT.

That has been the difference on this thread, someone like Adi2dassler who very sincerely and eloquently puts the case for an independent Scotland without feeling the need to constantly snipe at England and the English and others who have used it as an opportunity to air all their anti-English prejudices.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 4, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I wouldn't put it down to oil. More to do with synicall polititions lust for power during a period when we are unfortunately seeing how easy it is to wind up areas of the public by false promises and the grass is always greener syndrome. *The less well off will always be less well off and the rich will always be rich and get richer.
*
If iscot is going to cure all ills, will we see a mass exodus of Scots from RUK? Life's what you make off it. *Becoming Independant will not make the slightest difference to the average Scot IMHO*.
		
Click to expand...


Exactly. 

Anyone buying into this 'in charge of our own destiny' claptrap is deluded imo. The political elite will make the decisions (usually failing to live up to manifesto promises) as usual. Can you then say you got what you voted for?

Imo, in an independent Scotland it wouldn't be long before the public school educated proffesional career politician comes to the fore, as it is in Westminster. It will be a case of 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'. What then? 

By all means vote for independence if that is your thinking, but please don't kid yourself that it will be much different politically from what you want to leave behind. 

Guys like adi make convincing arguments (even if they're wrong  ) and I genuinely admire the conviction of their beliefs, but, the voices of people  like Jimmy Reid, Jim Sillars, Margo (even Sheridan perhaps) etc would get drowned out by the moneyed career politicians eventually. I hate to say it, as I have tremendous admiration for these first three (less so Sheridan) and genuinely wish we had more like them, but they and people like them would eventually end up lone voices (talking sense perhaps) but on the outside of decision making. Big hitters but ineffective, like Gorgeous George perhaps? 

I genuinely wish that were not the case, but believe in my heart by voting for independence you are merely getting rid of one lot of money grabbing, power hungry, corrupt, lying, cheating (infraction) and replacing them with another. Where is the gain in that for the ordinary man?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 4, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Because I think the real deep seated drive for independence is greed driven by oil revenues.  Not of the man in the street but by the political elite who see it as a way to increase their power
		
Click to expand...


There isn't really a 'political elite' in the Westminster mould in Scotland, there's a lack of career politicians unlike Westminster too.And the Nationalist movement in Scotland pre-dates the 70's oil boom by quite a distance.Oil revenues aren't a way to increase power, simply what they are-a revenue stream, like our water,our people and our long history of invention.

To suggest otherwise shows a deep misunderstanding of Scotland and its people.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 4, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Imo, in an independent Scotland it wouldn't be long before the public school educated proffesional career politician comes to the fore, as it is in Westminster. It will be a case of 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'. What then? 

the voices of people  like Jimmy Reid, Jim Sillars, Margo (even Sheridan perhaps) etc would get drowned out by the moneyed career politicians eventually.
		
Click to expand...

This is possible, but only if you let it happen.I'm of the opinion that this is an opportunity to create a new direction instead of the acceptance that we continue along the same road or replace like with like.I think your opinion is very negative, very pessimistic and dare I say it, very old school Scottish.Lets not allow things to keep on going the same way, lets atke the opportunity to reshape Scotland


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 4, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Finally!

An admission rather than the claptrap previously heard about weighing up things.

All that remains now is for similar honesty from your fellow anti- English campaigner, DfT.

That has been the difference on this thread, someone like Adi2dassler who very sincerely and eloquently puts the case for an independent Scotland without feeling the need to constantly snipe at England and the English and others who have used it as an opportunity to air all their anti-English prejudices.
		
Click to expand...

Not quite sure what I am admitting - and I have absolutely no idea at all why you think I am anti-English - in fact I am quite the opposite.

From mid-late 70s to mid-80s I voted SNP.  When I reflect on why I voted SNP I come up with some good reasons.  And on these if I had a vote as an ex-pat my gut *instinct *would today have me voting YES.  

But I can also see on reflection some ill-informed and poor reasons why I voted for the SNP.  And without living in Scotland and the closer understanding that that would give me of the general economic climate and feeling amongst Scots voters etc I am not at all sure that I would actually vote YES.  I still hear too much drivel coming from north of the border about England, the English and Westminster - and that suggests to me that many Scots are - like in part I was - ill-informed.  And that worries me.  And the more rubbish I hear the more I think a NO might be better.

And so when I say that some part of me actually hopes the vote is YES that is as much as anything based upon the negativity and whinging that I fear will go on and on following a NO.  It is not a good reason for a YES - but in many ways I just would like Scotland to get on with looking after themselves if it is so bleeding hard and painful to be part of the UK.

Is that honest enough?


----------



## c1973 (Jul 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is possible, but only if you let it happen.I'm of the opinion that this is an opportunity to create a new direction instead of the acceptance that we continue along the same road or replace like with like.I think your opinion is very negative, very pessimistic and dare I say it, very old school Scottish.Lets not allow things to keep on going the same way, lets atke the opportunity to reshape Scotland
		
Click to expand...

Adi, not so long ago I would have typed your response myself. I wish I could believe the ordinary people had the power to stop it happening, but they don't. Look at the public consultations we have up here, they pay lip service and then do what they want anyway regardless. 

You say pessimistic, you may well be correct, but I would say it was realistic. The guy in the street won't affect meaningful change, it just will not happen. How do you stop the career politician taking over? It has happened in every single country that I can think of, so why would we be different?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 4, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Adi, not so long ago I would have typed your response myself. I wish I could believe the ordinary people had the power to stop it happening, but they don't. Look at the public consultations we have up here, they pay lip service and then do what they want anyway regardless. 

You say pessimistic, you may well be correct, but I would say it was realistic. The guy in the street won't affect meaningful change, it just will not happen. How do you stop the career politician taking over? It has happened in every single country that I can think of, so why would we be different?
		
Click to expand...


The Scottish Parliament is pretty well established already, we're not starting from absolute zero if we vote yes.There are good and bad politicians in place already.Given the quite staggering explosion in involvement in the political process recently I think there's scope to avoid the career politicians.There is also the route of making it law that you can't stand for any party until you've gained some life experience/had an actual job outside politics for a predetermined time.Radical, but that's the opportunity voting yes gives us.

Lets use George Osbourne as a case in point, or most Chancellors in fact.He's got a 2:1 in History.Absolutley zero training/education in economics/accountancy.I find it incredible that anyone, from any party can be in charge of the economic structure of any country without formal training.That applies to John Swinney too.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 4, 2014)

Another wee thing.I went into Tesco this morning to grab something for my lunch and there was a food bank donation point set up.Spent Â£15 on stuff for it and never bothered with anything for lunch, felt pretty sick tbh.And yet today The Queen ( who I like and would want to keep as head of state) is just over the water launching a billion Â£ floating car park that's totally redundant as we can't afford the planes it's designed to carry until 2020 or later.

I find that incredible.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The Scottish Parliament is pretty well established already, we're not starting from absolute zero if we vote yes.There are good and bad politicians in place already.Given the quite staggering explosion in involvement in the political process recently I think there's scope to avoid the career politicians.There is also the route of making it law that you can't stand for any party until you've gained some life experience/had an actual job outside politics for a predetermined time.Radical, but that's the opportunity voting yes gives us.

Lets use George Osbourne as a case in point, or most Chancellors in fact.He's got a 2:1 in History.Absolutley zero training/education in economics/accountancy.I find it incredible that anyone, from any party can be in charge of the economic structure of any country without formal training.That applies to John Swinney too.
		
Click to expand...

And that is why it is, and always has been, unelected Senior Civil Servants who run our countries.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 4, 2014)

Interesting point by the journalist on Question Time last night.

'We vote for our MP's but we don't choose them. They are selected by the local political parties in that area, and that needs to change.'

Mickey....I am married to an English wife with two English daughters. Not so much anti English more pro equality.
Perhaps you would like to comment on the many anti Scottish posts early on in this thread from south of the border. 
They seem to be not so common now as folk are seeing a more honest picture.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The Scottish Parliament is pretty well established already, we're not starting from absolute zero if we vote yes.There are good and bad politicians in place already.Given the quite staggering explosion in involvement in the political process recently I think there's scope to avoid the career politicians.There is also the route of making it law that you can't stand for any party until you've gained some life experience/had an actual job outside politics for a predetermined time.Radical, but that's the opportunity voting yes gives us.

Lets use George Osbourne as a case in point, or most Chancellors in fact.He's got a 2:1 in History.Absolutley zero training/education in economics/accountancy.I find it incredible that anyone, from any party can be in charge of the economic structure of any country without formal training.That applies to John Swinney too.
		
Click to expand...

Agree with the second paragraph. 

As for the first? I don't doubt the sincerity of your ideals in making it law that you had to work x amount of years and its probably something where we broadly agree, but, unfortunately if you want to be in Europe you can't do that, age discrimination being covered in European law (I believe). The parliament is reasonably established I suppose, but is still a bairn in the grand scheme of things. The career politicians that will eventually attend are still in learning at the moment imo, they will materialise and there will be some in their already. Party politics will run the parliament and have the say (not the man in the street) as it is done in Westminster although I will concede that the way Holyrood is set up there is more chance of independents getting in which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I've always felt that we would end up with the 2nd rate politicians (it's all relative) that don't cut the mustard for Westminster. Obviously this wouldn't apply to SNP but the other main parties. Nothing to back that up mind you, just a hunch.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Another wee thing.I went into Tesco this morning to grab something for my lunch and there was a food bank donation point set up.Spent Â£15 on stuff for it and never bothered with anything for lunch, felt pretty sick tbh.And yet today The Queen ( who I like and would want to keep as head of state) is just over the water launching a billion Â£ floating car park that's totally redundant as we can't afford the planes it's designed to carry until 2020 or later.

*I find that incredible*.
		
Click to expand...

As do I, although the need to create jobs by building things like this needs to be considered.

The whole food bank thing disgusts me. I find it shocking given the relative wealth of our nation we have people struggling to put food on the table. 

Don't get me started on the homeless problem either!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 4, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Agree with the second paragraph. 

As for the first? I don't doubt the sincerity of your ideals in making it law that you had to work x amount of years and its probably something where we broadly agree, but, *unfortunately if you want to be in Europe you can't do that, age discrimination being covered in European law (I believe).* The parliament is reasonably established I suppose, but is still a bairn in the grand scheme of things. The career politicians that will eventually attend are still in learning at the moment imo, they will materialise and there will be some in their already. Party politics will run the parliament and have the say (not the man in the street) as it is done in Westminster although I will concede that the way Holyrood is set up there is more chance of independents getting in which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I've always felt that we would end up with the 2nd rate politicians (it's all relative) that don't cut the mustard for Westminster. Obviously this wouldn't apply to SNP but the other main parties. Nothing to back that up mind you, just a hunch.
		
Click to expand...

Hence another benefit to EFTA over EU I've argued on here since the beginning.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 4, 2014)

c1973 said:



			As do I, although the need to create jobs by building things like this needs to be considered.

The whole food bank thing disgusts me. I find it shocking given the relative wealth of our nation we have people struggling to put food on the table. 

Don't get me started on the homeless problem either!
		
Click to expand...

The jobs thing is an issue,but I hate the way these skilled guys are being used as a political football just now.There's a graphic showing the number of jobs before the last referendum in shipbuilding and the threat of voting yes.Look at that industry now.

The clyde basin offers an opportunity to retrain those guys.And a study I saw recently suggests the majority of folk employed on Faslane aren't local and head home every weekend.They spend very little time/money in the local community.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Hence another benefit to EFTA over EU I've argued on here since the beginning.
		
Click to expand...

A choice which I don't believe is on the table though. 

On that point though, surely you're not advocating a form of age discrimination for a parliament that has lowered the voting age temporarily, for a one off,  and allowed 16yr olds a say in the referendum; but would disbar them from taking a seat in it?


----------



## c1973 (Jul 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The jobs thing is an issue,but I hate the way these skilled guys are being used as a political football just now.There's a graphic showing the number of jobs before the last referendum in shipbuilding and the threat of voting yes.Look at that industry now.

The clyde basin offers an opportunity to retrain those guys.And a study I saw recently suggests the majority of folk employed on Faslane aren't local and head home every weekend.They spend very little time/money in the local community.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure of the facts and figures surrounding faslane etc, but it's a helluva lot of jobs and skillsets that could be lost. The arguments to replace them are (for me) unconvincing.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There is also the route of making it law that you can't stand for any party until you've gained some life experience/had an actual job outside politics for a predetermined time.Radical, but that's the opportunity voting yes gives us
.
		
Click to expand...

Thats what we would all like to see in the whole of UK with a lot of other caveats as well. this is not a Scottish problem.  But as its the polititians that make the rules, if you honestly think that voting yes would change the selection process you are going to be disappointed me feels.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Interesting point by the journalist on Question Time last night.

'We vote for our MP's but we don't choose them. They are selected by the local political parties in that area, and that needs to change.'

Mickey....I am married to an English wife with two English daughters. Not so much anti English more pro equality.
Perhaps you would like to comment on the many anti Scottish posts early on in this thread from south of the border. 
They seem to be not so common now as folk are seeing a more honest picture.
		
Click to expand...

I too have an English wife and son and daughter both born in Bristol and who consider themselves English - and I am thought of as holding anti-English views?  As I said - as much as I might disagree strongly with many of the views I hear expressed here in Surrey - and also about what emanates from Westminster - I don't dislike England and the English.  After all I've lived here 30yrs - I must like something about the bleeding people and place.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 4, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I must like something about the *bleeding people *and place.
		
Click to expand...

Freudian slip. Perhaps its the life style and the fact that the bleeding people dont blame you for all their ills.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Interesting point by the journalist on Question Time last night.

'We vote for our MP's but we don't choose them. They are selected by the local political parties in that area, and that needs to change.'

Mickey....I am married to an English wife with two English daughters. Not so much anti English more pro equality.
Perhaps you would like to comment on the many anti Scottish posts early on in this thread from south of the border. 
They seem to be not so common now as folk are seeing a more honest picture.
		
Click to expand...

I would think it is pretty obvious that as I am a proud Brit I am totally opposed to any expression of anti-Scot (or Welsh or Irish) comments .

It may be a paradox but I do feel that Ireland should be a unified, independent state. Scotland, Wales and England have been united as Great Britain for many years and I feel that we would be stronger together.

I do, however, feel that we would all benefit from less centralisation and more devolution to the regions and countries

It is annoying to me when I hear English people all bracketed together as some homogeneous bunch of Home Counties dwelling service industry employees. (Bankers could be another word!!)


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 4, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			I would think it is pretty obvious that as I am a proud Brit I am totally opposed to any expression of anti-Scot (or Welsh or Irish) comments .

It may be a paradox but I do feel that Ireland should be a unified, independent state. Scotland, Wales and England have been united as Great Britain for many years and I feel that we would be stronger together.

I do, however, feel that we would all benefit from less centralisation and more devolution to the regions and countries

It is annoying to me when I hear English people all bracketed together as some homogeneous bunch of Home Counties dwelling service industry employees. (Bankers could be another word!!)
		
Click to expand...

The North East [Of England] had the chance to become devolved a few years ago but voted by a massive majority to stay ruled by Westminster.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Interesting point by the journalist on Question Time last night.

'We vote for our MP's but we don't choose them. They are selected by the local political parties in that area, and that needs to change.'
		
Click to expand...


More worrying were the words of the lovely Diane in the following 'This Week'... Something along the lines of that the Labour group no longer has folk at the top table that know anything of doing a days work... ie With a bit of blood 'n sweat involved...


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The North East [Of England] had the chance to become devolved a few years ago but voted by a massive majority to stay ruled by Westminster.
		
Click to expand...


Hardly surprising.

If that had been the limit of powers proposed for Scottish devolution would the people of Scotland have gone for it.

That proposition was a very cheap attempt by the then Labour Government to sway the regions back towards them but as it only offered "powers" to promote and assist and would not even matched the authority of the London Assembly the voters saw through it.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 4, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			It is annoying to me when I hear English people all bracketed together as some homogeneous bunch of Home Counties dwelling service industry employees. (Bankers could be another word!!)
		
Click to expand...


I would like to point out, if I may, that despite the best efforts on many successive governments there are still some employed in manufacturing in the "Home Counties"...


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 4, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			I would like to point out, if I may, that despite the best efforts on many successive governments there are still some employed in manufacturing in the "Home Counties"...
		
Click to expand...


Exactly, it is that sort of generalisation that annoys me.

In other words we don't all live in the Home Counties and those that do are not all greedy bankers (that could have been a dangerous typo!)


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 4, 2014)

Again from Question Time at Croydon.

A resident said that the government will only take action with additional affordalbe housing in the south east when they don't get their bins emptied, their house burns down because there are no fireman or no nurses available in the hospitals.

So perhaps there is an imbalance of 'workers'.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 4, 2014)

Another point made on QT by Peter Hitchens.  He made a very valid point that was howled down by lefties regarding the shortfall in housing and pressurised public services being a result of the current and previous governments policy of allowing mass immigration.  He qualified his opinion, in that he lays no blame onto the immigrants themselves but on the politicians that have allowed this situation to occur and continue.   Unfortunately he received a lot of barracking by some that don't think anyone should be allowed put forward this point of view or even mention the 'i' word.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Again from Question Time at Croydon.

A resident said that the government will only take action with additional affordalbe housing in the south east when they don't get their bins emptied, their house burns down because there are no fireman or no nurses available in the hospitals.

So perhaps there is an imbalance of 'workers'.
		
Click to expand...

Some people say some strange things.   No Firemen, no Nurses in the hospitals.  Come on!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 7, 2014)

Scotland, For Richer, For Poorer presented by Robert Peston's was surprisingly interesting and balanced.
I generally can't stand the guy, as I think he goes out of the way to be rude and aggressive.

Did it show in rUK, if so what did you think?


----------



## chrisd (Jul 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Scotland, For Richer, For Poorer presented by Robert Peston's was surprisingly interesting and balanced.
I generally can't stand the guy, as I think he goes out of the way to be rude and aggressive.

Did it show in rUK, if so what did you think?
		
Click to expand...

Yes it was on here too. Didn't bother to watch it though as it's not any choice of ours what happens in the end!

If staying or leaving is ONLY about money then it's irrelevant to me which way the vote goes


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 8, 2014)

As the weeks have gone on I find myself getting more concerned about some of the stuff I hear expressed by some YES supporters - and in particular thoughts and perceptions of England and the English.  Because as I listen to some such ill-informed and blinkered opinions I wonder how much these voters actually understand about the key issues for their country - my country,

And so to today - I find myself for the first time thinking that if I had a vote I might well vote NO - despite my past record of 30+ yrs ago as an SNP voter - back then voting SNP on an independence ticket was easy as it didn't really matter as it wasn't on the table - today it does - and it is.  And the thing is I think that my inclination toward NO is ONLY because I live in England.  Had I not moved to England for work back in 1984 - and had stayed in Scotland like many schoolfriends have done -  I suspect that I might be a strong YES supporter.  My perceptions of Scotland as an insider and with living in Scotland would I suspect be very different from those of the outsider that I am today.

Saying that I could still see myself going into the ballot with intention to put a big X against NO - but at the last minute thinking 'why not - let's go for it' - because despite all the economic pros and cons - the gut instinct of many Scots is probably a wish to stand on our own two feet.


----------



## Val (Jul 8, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			As the weeks have gone on I find myself getting more concerned about some of the stuff I hear expressed by some YES supporters - and in particular thoughts and perceptions of England and the English.  Because as I listen to some such ill-informed and blinkered opinions I wonder how much these voters actually understand about the key issues for their country - my country.
		
Click to expand...

This interests me greatly, are you saying or suggesting there is an anti English feeling driving some of this?

I have strong views on what a lot of no supporters have on not just an anti English feeling but the feelings for those in the NO camp and in particular those in the public eye backing NO, JK Rowling as an example who took a power of abuse.

There is a lot of what i'd perceive to be bigotry driving many YES supporters.


----------



## DCB (Jul 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			This interests me greatly, are you saying or suggesting there is an anti English feeling driving some of this?

I have strong views on what a lot of no supporters have on not just an anti English feeling but the feelings for those in the NO camp and in particular those in the public eye backing NO, JK Rowling as an example who took a power of abuse.

There is a lot of what i'd perceive to be bigotry driving many YES supporters.
		
Click to expand...

Certainly seen some very aggressive Yes campaigners on a Saturday morning outside the shops. They don't seem to be able to accept that there is another view other than theirs. I've wondered if they actually understand what the democratic process is there for.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			This interests me greatly, are you saying or suggesting there is an anti English feeling driving some of this?

I have strong views on what a lot of no supporters have on not just an anti English feeling but the feelings for those in the NO camp and in particular those in the public eye backing NO, JK Rowling as an example who took a power of abuse.

*There is a lot of what i'd perceive to be bigotry driving many YES supporters.*

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with this, you will not find many (if any) who admit to it though, although I do accept not all are driven by this. 

I do believe that there is anti English sentiments amongst some of the general public, mostly through ignorance and a seriously flawed understanding of our shared history. England and Scotland may have had a few fights and fall outs over the years (usually caused by rich families with land on both sides of the border btw) but we were peaceable neighbours and partners for many more years, and long may that continue. 

We are, after all, 'aw Jock Tamsons bairns'.


----------



## CMAC (Jul 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



*Scotland, For Richer, For Poorer presented by Robert Peston's was surprisingly interesting and balanced.*
I generally can't stand the guy, as I think he goes out of the way to be rude and aggressive.

Did it show in rUK, if so what did you think?
		
Click to expand...

I watched it and agree with this sentiment, it was very interesting and I learned some very good facts about Scotland but no 'facts' about what the yes campaigners will do or achieve if the _dence_ :smirk: get their way.

It showed so much uncertainty and 'failure evidence' from the past of similar situations as well as some 'potential' positives if they follow countries like Norway in their oil money investments, but it's a big IF and even Salmond says it will cost us initially.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 8, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I watched it and agree with this sentiment, it was very interesting and I learned some very good facts about Scotland but no 'facts' about what the yes campaigners will do or achieve if the _dence_ :smirk: get their way.

It showed so much uncertainty and 'failure evidence' from the past of similar situations as well as some 'potential' positives if they follow countries like Norway in their oil money investments, but it's a big IF and even Salmond says it will cost us initially.
		
Click to expand...

Sobering thought that a tax hike of 1% would be required long term for Scotland to pay back our share [8.5%] of the UK's debt.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Sobering thought that a tax hike of 1% would be required long term for Scotland to pay back our share [8.5%] of the UK's debt.
		
Click to expand...

Aye, but the oil will cover that! No doubt it will be argued that it's a small price to pay etc etc.  

I never actually watched the programme (visitors) and I have in the main switched off to the arguments for and against now (over exposure does that), but I might have a look on the red button to catch it.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			This interests me greatly, are you saying or suggesting there is an anti English feeling driving some of this?

I have strong views on what a lot of no supporters have on not just an anti English feeling but the feelings for those in the NO camp and in particular those in the public eye backing NO, JK Rowling as an example who took a power of abuse.

There is a lot of what i'd perceive to be bigotry driving many YES supporters.
		
Click to expand...




DCB said:



			Certainly seen some very aggressive Yes campaigners on a Saturday morning outside the shops. They don't seem to be able to accept that there is another view other than theirs. I've wondered if they actually understand what the democratic process is there for.
		
Click to expand...




c1973 said:



			I tend to agree with this, you will not find many (if any) who admit to it though, although I do accept not all are driven by this. 

I do believe that there is anti English sentiments amongst some of the general public, mostly through ignorance and a seriously flawed understanding of our shared history. England and Scotland may have had a few fights and fall outs over the years (usually caused by rich families with land on both sides of the border btw) but we were peaceable neighbours and partners for many more years, and long may that continue. 

We are, after all, 'aw Jock Tamsons bairns'.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting point of view.That aggression and negativity is predominantly an affliction of those voting YES in September.

And yet last week a Labour candidate had to resign after tweeting a picture of Hilter Youth and comparing them to kids with yes badges.And for every nasty word said about JKR there is equal words for the Weirs.And ADarling comparing Salmond to the former leader of NKorea, but then hiding behind 'I wiz only jokin'.Reverse the roles and imagine the MSM outcry if the fat jambo had said that about Cameron.

Seriously, if you think that stupidity,aggression and lies are unique to one side of this debate, then not only are you awfy delicate and sheltered, but incredibly deluded too.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Interesting point of view.That aggression and negativity is predominantly an affliction of those voting YES in September.

And yet last week a Labour candidate had to resign after tweeting a picture of Hilter Youth and comparing them to kids with yes badges.And for every nasty word said about JKR there is equal words for the Weirs.And ADarling comparing Salmond to the former leader of NKorea, but then hiding behind 'I wiz only jokin'.Reverse the roles and imagine the MSM outcry if the fat jambo had said that about Cameron.

Seriously, if you think that stupidity,aggression and lies are unique to one side of this debate, then not only are you awfy delicate and sheltered, but incredibly deluded too.
		
Click to expand...

Show me where I say any of the above is unique to one side. 

I was commenting on a post about anti English sentiment. Nothing to do with Hitler Youth, Harry Potter or the Weirs and Kim Jong Il (or whatever his name is). What your post shows is (despite being perfectly capable of forming and opining a point of view) when there is the slightest hint of an uncomfortable truth emerging that doesn't sit well with the yes campaign, then the name calling, insults and whataboutery are rolled out. 

The whole debate has been tarnished by this behaviour and it is beyond boring now and imo is now insulting to those (and I would include yourself and other yes campaigners too) who wish to hear reasoned debate. 

And, I am neither delicate ,nor I can assure you, am I sheltered or deluded.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 8, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Show me where I say any of the above is unique to one side. 

I was commenting on a post about anti English sentiment. Nothing to do with Hitler Youth, Harry Potter or the Weirs and Kim Jong Il (or whatever his name is). What your post shows is (despite being perfectly capable of forming and opining a point of view) when there is the slightest hint of an uncomfortable truth emerging that doesn't sit well with the yes campaign, then the name calling, insults and whataboutery are rolled out. 

The whole debate has been tarnished by this behaviour and it is beyond boring now and imo is now insulting to those (and I would include yourself and other yes campaigners too) who wish to hear reasoned debate. 

And, I am neither delicate ,nor I can assure you, am I sheltered or deluded. 

Click to expand...

you never offered a counter point suggesting that The BT campaign are equally as guilty.

I'm all for reasoned debate, I've yet to see much coming from BT but if you can point me in the direction I'll be happy enough to debate it.A good example of this is the refusal of BT to engage in debate, the constant withdrawal of BT from events simply because a YES delegate is going to be there.

I maybe do get a overly defensive, but constant sniping eventually wears you down.I'll say it again, the accusation of cybernatery is over played in the extreme.I do my fair share of reasoned debating on here, mostly in the face of opposition, once and a while I get fed up with the moral high ground being occupied by folk falsely.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 8, 2014)

Valentino said:



			This interests me greatly, are you saying or suggesting there is an anti English feeling driving some of this?

I have strong views on what a lot of no supporters have on not just an anti English feeling but the feelings for those in the NO camp and in particular those in the public eye backing NO, JK Rowling as an example who took a power of abuse.

There is a lot of what i'd perceive to be bigotry driving many YES supporters.
		
Click to expand...

As an example - listening to a YES contributor on R5L yesterday morning I found myself cringing at the anti-English, verging on racist, nature of many of the points and 'issues' being raised.  In fact Nicky Campbell (bless his cotton socks) gently made that point as the contributor sounded a very nice highland lady who I am sure could never consider herself racist - indeed would be mightily affronted.  But none the less and no matter how committed and emotionally she felt for a YES and her love of her country - I was disappointed that she expressed her views in the way she did.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



*you never offered a counter point suggesting that The BT campaign are equally as guilty.

*I'm all for reasoned debate, I've yet to see much coming from BT but if you can point me in the direction I'll be happy enough to debate it.A good example of this is the refusal of BT to engage in debate, the constant withdrawal of BT from events simply because a YES delegate is going to be there.

I maybe do get a overly defensive, but constant sniping eventually wears you down.I'll say it again, the accusation of cybernatery is over played in the extreme.I do my fair share of reasoned debating on here, mostly in the face of opposition, once and a while I get fed up with the moral high ground being occupied by folk falsely.
		
Click to expand...


That's because I don't believe the no campaign are guilty of anti English sentiment, which is what I was commenting on.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 8, 2014)

I NEED to hear rational pro-Scotland arguments - arguments that consider political and cultural differences and perhaps how Westminster and the UK CoG that is London and the SE *may *not allow for these differences to be expressed through such as socio-economic and tax and spending policies.  But when I hear of 'the English this' and 'England that' the YES campaign (through no fault of their own) starts to lose me.

Saying all of that - and despite my concerns, perhaps I would be happier if YES won the day - because then and only then will I hear no more 'the English this' and 'England that' whinging coming from home north of the border.  And maybe that is a price worth paying.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 8, 2014)

c1973 said:



			That's because I don't believe the no campaign are guilty of anti English sentiment, which is what I was commenting on.
		
Click to expand...

Fair point.


----------



## Rumpokid (Jul 9, 2014)

Ha ha ha ..Just seen smug Salmon on an opportunistic photoshoot with Phil, ahead of Scottish open...Don't think Phil Mick new who he was..Maybe a photo bomber..:lol:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 9, 2014)

OR

Good to see the First Minister of Scotland taking time out of his busy schedule to support golf and the Scottish Open.


----------



## Rumpokid (Jul 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			OR

Good to see the First Minister of Scotland taking time out of his busy schedule to support golf and the Scottish Open.
		
Click to expand...

Oops silly me ,overlooking what a great,very busy,fan of golf that this man is


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 9, 2014)

Its Wed, sports afternoon. He is a fine tuned sports man didn't you know.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			OR

Good to see the First Minister of Scotland taking time out of his busy schedule to support golf and the Scottish Open.
		
Click to expand...




Rumpokid said:



			Oops silly me ,overlooking what a great,very busy,fan of golf that this man is
		
Click to expand...

As much as I think Salmond is a fud, Dft is right enough he is pretty supportive of the Scottish Open........he's still a fud though.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 9, 2014)

Rumpokid said:



			Oops silly me ,overlooking what a great,very busy,fan of golf that this man is
		
Click to expand...

Like some others I am not very keen on the man but be fair and show me a political leader, North or South of the border, who does not jump at a photo opportunity.


----------



## Rumpokid (Jul 9, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Like some others I am not very keen on the man but be fair and show me a political leader, North or South of the border, who does not jump at a photo opportunity.
		
Click to expand...

I agree..Fair comment.If there was an England debate thread, and Shameron(or mister slippery, as he is also known), showing his face at photo ops, i would equally comment for what it is worth.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 9, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Its Wed, sports afternoon. He is a fine tuned sports man didn't you know.
		
Click to expand...

He is a Jambo and a golfer so yes, a true genuine fan.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 10, 2014)

...and so I listen to Francis Maud this morning talking about plans for 'the unions' - banning strikes in some areas of the public sector; new rules for strike ballots and mandates being give for same; talking about the 'importance' of public sector workers and yet also seeming to hold them in some disdain.  And so I think - well vote NO and that's the sort of stuff and government mindset that you are signing up for.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 10, 2014)

He was talking about banning strikes in SOME ESSENTIAL public sector areas - already practice in SOME public sector areas.

Making unions who hold ballots ensure that a larger number of their members actually vote for a strike rather than let others do their dirty work but takethe day off anyway.

I was away on holiday a couple of weeks ago where a "fireman"complained that you cannot expect fireman to be fighting fires at 60. I quiteagree having had to spend time doing the job. However, he was well over 20 stone, had problems getting in and out ofthe pool and I would suspect had never been involved in fire fighting for manya year so I suspect there are areas of the service which could work until theyare 60,

Its about checks and balance. Unfortunately, unions and politicians have nevermanaged to strike a happy medium in the public sector.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 10, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Making unions who hold ballots ensure that a larger number of their members actually vote for a strike rather than let others do their dirty work but takethe day off anyway.
		
Click to expand...

Sweet Caroline, I'm just about to agree with the old fart from Devon ;-)

There should be, in the case of firemen/teachers and other 'essential' unions a minimum of say, 75% of union members casting their vote.But I think it should be law that everyone votes in elections, so I'm mibbe a wee bit extreme with this one.

As for Salmond supporting The Scottish Open, he's there every year, the fat jambo not only loves industrial football, he genuinely loves golf.Just wait for the Ryder Cup, he'll be on the 1st tee asking for a go!


----------



## Val (Jul 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Sweet Caroline, I'm just about to agree with the old fart from Devon ;-)

There should be, in the case of firemen/teachers and other 'essential' unions a minimum of say, 75% of union members casting their vote.But I think it should be law that everyone votes in elections, so I'm mibbe a wee bit extreme with this one.

As for Salmond supporting The Scottish Open, he's there every year, the fat jambo not only loves industrial football, he genuinely loves golf.Just wait for the Ryder Cup, he'll be on the 1st tee asking for a go!
		
Click to expand...

Amazing, im in 100% agreement here. Salmond has been a big supporter of all sports in Scotland to be fair but I think he over does his appearances, he could turn up and stand aside rather than get involved the way he does.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There should be, in the case of firemen/teachers and other 'essential' unions a minimum of say, 75% of union members casting their vote.But I think it should be law that everyone votes in elections, so I'm mibbe a wee bit extreme with this one.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, but when did teachers become "essential"?


----------



## c1973 (Jul 10, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Sorry, but when did teachers become "essential"?
		
Click to expand...

Ever since people wanted their kids to learn a bit more than their abc's I'd imagine.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 10, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Ever since people wanted their kids to learn a bit more than their abc's I'd imagine.
		
Click to expand...


But essential? Life 'n death stuff? Them taking time out is an inconvenience and that's about it...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Sweet Caroline, I'm just about to agree with the old fart from Devon ;-)

There should be, in the case of firemen/teachers and other 'essential' unions a minimum of say, 75% of union members casting their vote.*But I think it should be law that everyone votes in elections*, so I'm mibbe a wee bit extreme with this one.

As for Salmond supporting The Scottish Open, he's there every year, the fat jambo not only loves industrial football, he genuinely loves golf.Just wait for the Ryder Cup, he'll be on the 1st tee asking for a go!
		
Click to expand...

Can't force people to make a choice - 

I believe there should be an option on the voting slip of - none of the above


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Sweet Caroline, I'm just about to agree with the old fart from Devon ;-)

But I think it should be law that everyone votes in elections, so I'm mibbe a wee bit extreme with this one.
		
Click to expand...

Less of the old but your dead right on this and no I don't think it's extreme.  Works well in Aussie with lots of fines going out.

Fed up with people whinging and then moaning about which party forms the government then hear them say that they couldn't be arrsed to vote.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 10, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Less of the old but your dead right on this and no I don't think it's extreme.  Works well in Aussie with lots of fines going out.

Fed up with people whinging and then moaning about which party forms the government then hear them say that they couldn't be arrsed to vote.
		
Click to expand...

Jings, now I'm agreeing with him.
Must have been that second beer.

BTW it is roasting up here in Ayrshire.
We took the grandkids to the beach at Girvan yesterday and the 4 year old was enjoying her jeely piece lunch. She held her hand up to demonstrate something she was saying and a blooming great seagull swooped down and pinched it out of her hand.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 10, 2014)

Just saw the mad highlander on QT, advocating his love for the union. I've changed my mind.......I'm voting for independence....... from the highlands!!


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 11, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Just saw the mad highlander on QT, advocating his love for the union. I've changed my mind.......I'm voting for independence....... from the highlands!! 

Click to expand...

QT, always find 1 loon per prgramme.  Sometimes I think its so over the top they could be plants.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Just saw the mad highlander on QT, advocating his love for the union. I've changed my mind.......I'm voting for independence....... from the highlands!! 

Click to expand...

He was good value.......now let me see, I should vote No for God and The Regiment.
If he had said which God and which Regiment I might have been persuaded


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			He was good value.......now let me see, I should vote No for God and The Regiment.
If he had said which God and which Regiment I might have been persuaded
		
Click to expand...

He is ex Royal Highland Fussiliers.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 11, 2014)

I missed QT last night ( gone right down hill since they've put celebs on the panels imo) was it from Scotland or elsewhere with just one question about the referendum?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I missed QT last night ( gone right down hill since they've put celebs on the panels imo) was it from Scotland or elsewhere with just one question about the referendum?
		
Click to expand...

From Inverness.
Dimbleby is like Alliss now, both should have been put out to grass years ago.
Amazed Alliss is still on this year after his shocking show in 2013.

Ricky Ross was Ok the rest were hopeless. [except Scott Hastings, he was clueless and hopeless.]


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			From Inverness.
Dimbleby is like Alliss now, both should have been put out to grass years ago.
Amazed Alliss is still on this year after his shocking show in 2013.

Ricky Ross was Ok the rest were hopeless. [except Scott Hastings, he was clueless and hopeless.]
		
Click to expand...

So, Ricky Ross and Scott Hastings were on the panel?Not surprised Eddi Reader didn't get back on after her last embarrassing performance.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I missed QT last night ( gone right down hill since they've put celebs on the panels imo) was it from Scotland or elsewhere with just one question about the referendum?
		
Click to expand...

Inverness I believe. I only caught the first 20 minutes which was about the referendum. Esteemed guests such as Ricky Ross and that Joan Burnie clown were on it.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I missed QT last night ( gone right down hill since they've put celebs on the panels imo) was it from Scotland or elsewhere with just one question about the referendum?
		
Click to expand...


It was from north of the wall and not a politician in sight.... One gentleman [in the audience] spoke with a good deal of passion which for me is to be admired irrespective of whether you  agree or not with his stance...


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 11, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Inverness I believe. I only caught the first 20 minutes which was about the referendum. Esteemed guests such as Ricky Ross and that Joan Burnie clown were on it. 

Click to expand...

wtf is Joan Burnie?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 11, 2014)

All 'celebs' no politicos.  The proponents of NO (Scotland and Lions rugby player and a business man) and those of YES (50-something lead singer of an 80s rock/pop ban and a veteran Daily Record columnist) probably reflected the nature of the NO and YES campaigns and supporters in general.

And then there was the wild man from the north in the audience - good value


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...heart-of-twitter_n_5576432.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

There he goes.


----------



## c1973 (Jul 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			wtf is Joan Burnie?
		
Click to expand...

She's that Just Joan agony aunt woman from the Daylate Record. Utter buffoon if you ask me (not because of her view on the ref, but in general).


----------



## c1973 (Jul 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...heart-of-twitter_n_5576432.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

There he goes.
		
Click to expand...

He kinda reminded me of Father Jack. Obviously Ted and Dougal had given him a bit of a tidy, but Father Jack nonetheless.

Tbf to him he was passionate in his beliefs, which is to be applauded.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

Did not quite hear the reply from Orion boss Alan Savage that the audience shouted down.

Did he suggest that many Scots were voting Yes out of anti English sentiment?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

c1973 said:



			She's that Just Joan agony aunt woman from the Daylate Record. Utter buffoon if you ask me (not because of her view on the ref, but in general).
		
Click to expand...

You take the Daily Record then

[or like me just read it in the barbers!]


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			wtf is Joan Burnie?
		
Click to expand...


They had her listed as an agony aunt but I think they got that the wrong way round ....

Didn't have too high an opinion of those of us from south of the wall...


----------



## c1973 (Jul 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You take the Daily Record then

[or like me just read it in the barbers!]
		
Click to expand...


No! 

I stopped buying newspapers (Glasgow Herald) a while ago, stopped with the Record and Sun even longer. Pick one up occasionally if I have to hang around or if I fancy reading an article.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

c1973 said:



			No! 

I stopped buying newspapers (Glasgow Herald) a while ago, stopped with the Record and Sun even longer. Pick one up occasionally if I have to hang around or if I fancy reading an article.
		
Click to expand...

I stopped buying the Herald on principle. [when it went up to Â£1]


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Did not quite hear the reply from Orion boss Alan Savage that the audience shouted down.

Did he suggest that many Scots were voting Yes out of anti English sentiment?
		
Click to expand...


Apologies for my ignorance but is this gentleman a Scot? Not really heard of him?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 11, 2014)

c1973 said:



			She's that Just Joan agony aunt woman from the Daylate Record. Utter buffoon if you ask me (not because of her view on the ref, but in general).
		
Click to expand...

She didn't strike me as an 'utter buffoon' last night.  On many topics and subjects she may well be - but maybe they weren't discussed last night and so the broader audience wouldn't know.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Did not quite hear the reply from Orion boss Alan Savage that the audience shouted down.

Did he suggest that many Scots were voting Yes out of anti English sentiment?
		
Click to expand...

Yes - that was what did stir things up at little.  

But I know of Scots voting NO because they support (Glasgow) Rangers


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 11, 2014)

c1973 said:



			No! 

I stopped buying newspapers (Glasgow Herald) a while ago, stopped with the Record and Sun even longer. Pick one up occasionally if I have to hang around or if I fancy reading an article.
		
Click to expand...

When I'm home at my mother's my local RS McColls (yes that dates me I know) gives me the Record free when I buy The Herald and The i - but to be honest even free it isn't worth spending my time reading it


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 11, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Apologies for my ignorance but is this gentleman a Scot? Not really heard of him?
		
Click to expand...

erm...no...he isn't - Chairman of Orion Group (I think his nametag said).  So putting the BT case - an international rugby player who went to private school (George Watsons College, Edinburgh) and an English businessman   Hmmm.  Ach well - BT campaign is a broad church.  Unfortunately I don't think they made much of a case for BT


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes - that was what did stir things up at little.  

But I know of Scots voting NO because they support (Glasgow) Rangers
		
Click to expand...

These guys? 

[video=youtube;pmGjiokfQ2A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmGjiokfQ2A[/video]


----------



## c1973 (Jul 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			These guys? 

[video=youtube;pmGjiokfQ2A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmGjiokfQ2A[/video]
		
Click to expand...

I've always said 'never drink on an empty heid'. I think that's decent evidence the empty heid part is more worrying than the drink.

:rofl:


----------



## c1973 (Jul 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes - that was what did stir things up at little.  

But I know of Scots voting NO because they support (Glasgow) Rangers
		
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to believe they will be voting no AND they support Rangers, not BECAUSE (I may be wrong, as you do seem to know a lot of people with some strange,indeed sometimes contentious, imo, thoughts on independence).


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			These guys? 

[video=youtube;pmGjiokfQ2A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmGjiokfQ2A[/video]
		
Click to expand...

Not just these numpties.  If some of them will leave Scotland if there is a YES - then what an incentive to vote YES.  Good luck Wales mind!  They don't want to come to England which is a relief.

Unfortunately not just the brain dead but some intelligent folks supporting Rangers wrapping themselves in teh Union Jack - becuase that's what Rangers stands for to them.  Ah well.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

The Orion Chairman did seem to colour up a bit with the [for him] unexpected audience response to his silly statement.
He was doing quite well up to then.
Moving in the wrong circles perhaps.


----------



## Val (Jul 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Did not quite hear the reply from Orion boss Alan Savage that the audience shouted down.

Did he suggest that many Scots were voting Yes out of anti English sentiment?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, and he is not wrong. Many will vote through anti english sentiment which will be dressed up as a split from Westminster and the south.



SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes - that was what did stir things up at little.  

But I know of Scots voting NO because they support (Glasgow) Rangers
		
Click to expand...

It wouldn't surprise me but don't tar them all with the same brush (but tar most  )



c1973 said:



			I'm inclined to believe they will be voting no AND they support Rangers, not BECAUSE (I may be wrong, as you do seem to know a lot of people with some strange,indeed sometimes contentious, imo, thoughts on independence). 



Click to expand...

Don't let a good headline separate hard facts eh


----------



## delc (Jul 11, 2014)

Bearing in mind that James VI of Scotland became James I of England/United Kingdom, I think the English should have a refendum on leaving the UK!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

delc said:



			Bearing in mind that James VI of Scotland became James I of England/United Kingdom, I think the English should have a refendum on leaving the UK! 

Click to expand...

.......and QE2 should have been named QE1


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 11, 2014)

It's not earth shattering news that the majority of Rangers supporters will probably vote NO.The culture of Rangers as an institution is one of being proud to be British, to support The Orange Order, God Save The Queen and Rule Britannia.I've got no issue with that ( except the orange order, who I really don't like)

But interestingly, there is (pretty unscientific) info suggesting the opposite. 
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/old-firm-united-both-celtic-3598872

If you look the two biggest fan sites for Hibs and Hearts, you'll find that they too are pretty big supporters of YES
http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?271802-Scottish-Independence

http://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/index...m-superthread-campaign-posts-will-be-removed/

That one from kickback isn't actually a poll but a long and decent read imo.They do run a monthly poll which I couldn;t find that always comes down heavily pro indy

HOWEVER.I think that online football fans aren't the best sample from any team.Always gonna who more left wing imo, just like a golf forum isn't the best sample either...always gonna be more right wing imo...the natures of their sports.


----------



## delc (Jul 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			.......and QE2 should have been named QE1

Click to expand...

Fair point!!! Seriously, I think further sub-dividing our relatively small island is not a good idea. Scotland already has a fair degree of independence, and goodies that the rest of the UK don't get such as free University tuition fees. Not to mention loads of very cheap municipal golf courses! Leave the UK as it is!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

........and for folk who think this forum strange.

The Hibs football forum were discussing early lending libraries on the Independence thread.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 11, 2014)

Here's something to think about if you have any interest in The NHS

[video=youtube;esV6pGo8UTI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esV6pGo8UTI[/video]


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 11, 2014)

c1973 said:



			I'm inclined to believe they will be voting no AND they support Rangers, not BECAUSE (I may be wrong, as you do seem to know a lot of people with some strange,indeed sometimes contentious, imo, thoughts on independence). 



Click to expand...

Im inclined to believe they won't even be arrsed to vote unless someone sets up a polling station in the pub.


----------



## Val (Jul 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Here's something to think about if you have any interest in The NHS

[video=youtube;esV6pGo8UTI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esV6pGo8UTI[/video]
		
Click to expand...

I haven't even watched this but wouldn't give it the time of day. Can someone explain to me why if Scotland vote no why would they be excluded from the free NHS? 

Absolute nonsense.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I haven't even watched this but wouldn't give it the time of day. Can someone explain to me why if Scotland vote no why would they be excluded from the free NHS? 

Absolute nonsense.
		
Click to expand...

You'll need to watch it to find out


----------



## c1973 (Jul 11, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Im inclined to believe they won't even be arrsed to vote unless someone sets up a polling station in the pub.
		
Click to expand...


You could well be right.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			You'll need to watch it to find out
		
Click to expand...

I would second that. Open your mind to another view.

I have heard some sorry NHS tales from my English friends and relatives.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			You'll need to watch it to find out
		
Click to expand...

So we have someone from Ireland with a German husband knocking GB and scaremongering about the NHS with no facts backing up the claim. Sounds like a lady who would be heading for a well paid job if you get an iscot. And a public sector worker. Wonder if she was sticking yesterday.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I have heard some sorry NHS tales from my English friends and relatives.
		
Click to expand...

No good ones then. Your friends must be very unlucky. I think everyone would agree that there are major problems in the NHS but it's all about where the taxÂ£'s are spent.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 11, 2014)

Likeif you need to see a consultant you are limited to those your gp has an agreement with - and that consultant may not be not be at the hospital you want treated at or indeed your own local hospital


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 11, 2014)

I noted that on introducing QT last night DD referred to the panel as 'laity' as opposed to the normal bunch of politicians - though in referring to laity methinks he forgot which country he was in


----------



## Val (Jul 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I would second that. Open your mind to another view.

I have heard some sorry NHS tales from my English friends and relatives.
		
Click to expand...

So it's another view not a fact, so im right then, it's nonsense


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 11, 2014)

Is this time to say those in Falkirk are fed up because of the waiting times to have their bins empty?


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 11, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			No good ones then. Your friends must be very unlucky. I think everyone would agree that there are major problems in the NHS but it's all about where the taxÂ£'s are spent.
		
Click to expand...

Thats correct.  They have also inherited another 4 million customers in the last decade.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So it's another view not a fact, so im right then, it's nonsense
		
Click to expand...

If you watched it, it was a pretty level headed tale about the differences in the Scottish and English NHS and her view on the future
of both.


----------



## Val (Jul 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If you watched it, it was a pretty level headed tale about the differences in the Scottish and English NHS and her view on the future
of both.
		
Click to expand...

So nothing at all with Scotland losing the free NHS


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So nothing at all with Scotland losing the free NHS
		
Click to expand...

Just watch it and you may understand!


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Just watch it and you may understand!
		
Click to expand...

She was a left wing public sector worker having a bitch.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 13, 2014)

I was listening to 5Live a minute ago and there was a Scottish finance guy on - Carmicheal i think his name was 

Anyway he was discussing the membership into the EU - currently obviously the UK has membership and if Scotland did vote yes then that membership would still continue for the UK. Now Scotland obviously would need to apply for membership and he was saying there is no set time for that to be accepted as there could be some issues to sort out and some countries would have extra demands ( he mentioned Spain ) and he came up with some reasoned comments and seem to speak a lot of sense - 

Alex Salmonds reply was - There is no issue Scotland will be accepted straight away - and that was it - Carmicheal then just stated that Salmond needs to start accepting that there could be issues in regards independance and its time he stops dismissing them and burying himself in the sand - they were saying that one of the biggest negative factors towards independance is Salmond himself and his attitude


----------



## 19thagain (Jul 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I was listening to 5Live a minute ago and there was a Scottish finance guy on - Carmicheal i think his name was 

Anyway he was discussing the membership into the EU - currently obviously the UK has membership and if Scotland did vote yes then that membership would still continue for the UK. Now Scotland obviously would need to apply for membership and he was saying there is no set time for that to be accepted as there could be some issues to sort out and some countries would have extra demands ( he mentioned Spain ) and he came up with some reasoned comments and seem to speak a lot of sense - 

Alex Salmonds reply was - There is no issue Scotland will be accepted straight away - and that was it - Carmicheal then just stated that Salmond needs to start accepting that there could be issues in regards independance and its time he stops dismissing them and burying himself in the sand - they were saying that one of the biggest negative factors towards independance is Salmond himself and his attitude
		
Click to expand...

I respect where you are coming from with, what is, the view of one side of the argument.

Up here Alex Salmond enjoys very high support in the face of all the jibes from the Press.

I do not think his head is in the sand but as an economist, it is full of statistics  that could make sense.

Will England/Britain be in the EU after the vote that is being promised, maybe Mr Carmichael was also able to predict this as well.

It could be Scotland in, England out.

It will take time for our new nation to get down the correct path and maybe during this time we will make less head way than the rest of the UK but when it all comes together we will have a country that is ours, not a Home Counties ruled country, with the values we embrace and that believe it or not, is not financial but a better social future for our generations coming behind us.

Â£500 better off, Â£1000 better off? Who cares, it is the health of OUR nation that matters in an ongoing global market and guess what? We are all grown ups and accept that mistakes will happen, that in some ways we should still be in the UK but overall our future .... and we will have one, will be dictated by Scots in Scotland.

The currency, interest rates, etc, will all sort themselves out in the fullness of time as we get stronger, with maybe a wee hurting along the way. It is like watching your child learning to crawl, walk and then run - you know as a parent there will be a few cut knees, bruised brows and tears but when you see them run in their school sports that is all forgotten because it was a price worth paying!

Now remind me again why England want us to stay in the Union?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 13, 2014)

19thagain said:



			I respect where you are coming from with, what is, the view of one side of the argument.

Up here Alex Salmond enjoys very high support in the face of all the jibes from the Press.

I do not think his head is in the sand but as an economist, it is full of statistics  that could make sense.

Will England/Britain be in the EU after the vote that is being promised, maybe Mr Carmichael was also able to predict this as well.

It could be Scotland in, England out.

It will take time for our new nation to get down the correct path and maybe during this time we will make less head way than the rest of the UK but when it all comes together we will have a country that is ours, not a Home Counties ruled country, with the values we embrace and that believe it or not, is not financial but a better social future for our generations coming behind us.

Â£500 better off, Â£1000 better off? Who cares, it is the health of OUR nation that matters in an ongoing global market and guess what? We are all grown ups and accept that mistakes will happen, that in some ways we should still be in the UK but overall our future .... and we will have one, will be dictated by Scots in Scotland.

The currency, interest rates, etc, will all sort themselves out in the fullness of time as we get stronger, with maybe a wee hurting along the way. It is like watching your child learning to crawl, walk and then run - you know as a parent there will be a few cut knees, bruised brows and tears but when you see them run in their school sports that is all forgotten because it was a price worth paying!

Now remind me again why England want us to stay in the Union?
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but the union isnt just England - England arent in the EU - the UK are and will stay in the EU regardless of what happens.

UK wants Scotland to stay in the union ( England , Wales and N Ireland ) because many believe in strength in numbers.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 13, 2014)

Corby Votes No!

414 votes for No

162 votes for Yes


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 13, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Corby Votes No!

414 votes for No

162 votes for Yes
		
Click to expand...

From Scots living in England......not really a surprise then.

Re. Strength in numbers.
John Boyle used that argument in a recent debate but a guy from the audience said. 'If Scotland were just a wee country on it's own. We would have no WMD's and would not have become involved in illegal wars.'


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			From Scots living in England......not really a surprise then.

Re. Strength in numbers.
John Boyle used that argument in a recent debate but a guy from the audience said. 'If Scotland were just a wee country on it's own. We would have no WMD's and would not have become involved in illegal wars.'
		
Click to expand...

Believe latest polls have the yes down to 32%

And if we were to become part of NATO you would be involved in the same conflicts


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Believe latest polls have the yes down to 32%
		
Click to expand...

Phil, the polls are all over the place, nobody in Scotland takes any notice of them.

We do sometime tell little porkies to the pollsters just to keep them on their toes.

The last Scottish election should have been be a good indicator.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 13, 2014)

19thagain said:



			Now remind me again why England want us to stay in the Union?
		
Click to expand...

And there is the problem with the yes campaign, it is so England centric they forget about the RUK.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			From Scots living in England......not really a surprise then..'
		
Click to expand...

And there are so many of them, I wonder what is so bad about living in Scotland. Surely it's not just the midges.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Believe latest polls have the yes down to 32%

And if we were to become part of NATO you would be involved in the same conflicts
		
Click to expand...

I don't think NATO were involved in any illegal wars.


----------



## 19thagain (Jul 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Sorry but the union isnt just England - England arent in the EU - the UK are and will stay in the EU regardless of what happens.

UK wants Scotland to stay in the union ( England , Wales and N Ireland ) because many believe in strength in numbers.
		
Click to expand...

Yes I did use England instead of UK but I wonder at your belief that the rUK will survive the in/out EU vote considering the UKIP increasing support in England (not so much in Wales and N Ireland)

We have over the years received media coverage, no doubt Westminster led, that we were/are a drain on the UK economy ... well, now we can be off loaded to allow the rUK to blossom without us.

Simples!


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			From Scots living in England......not really a surprise then.

Re. Strength in numbers.
John Boyle used that argument in a recent debate but a guy from the audience said. 'If Scotland were just a wee country on it's own. We would have no WMD's and would not have become involved in illegal wars.'
		
Click to expand...

How dare you suggest Corby is in England.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I don't think NATO were involved in any illegal wars.
		
Click to expand...


Didn't realise there was such a thing as a 'legal' war...


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I don't think NATO were involved in any illegal wars.
		
Click to expand...

Depends which ones you class as illegal


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 13, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Didn't realise there was such a thing as a 'legal' war...
		
Click to expand...

Is the correct answer


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I don't think NATO were involved in any illegal wars.
		
Click to expand...

Really ? What do you call the last illegal war then and I'll tell you if NATO were involved or not


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Really ? What do you call the last illegal war then and I'll tell you if NATO were involved or not
		
Click to expand...

Could be a long wait. Would it be the Malayan campaign or the battle for Regina's in Paderborn.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 14, 2014)

A lot of research going on for this one.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 14, 2014)

Deary me, I did not reply as I thought that most UK citizens had sorted that one out out years ago.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Deary me, I did not reply as I thought that most UK citizens had sorted that one out out years ago.
		
Click to expand...

And I thought it was the normal Yes voter "no answer" no response. Thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 14, 2014)

I hope you are not implying that I am a Yes voter.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I hope you are not implying that I am a Yes voter.
		
Click to expand...

Never passed my mind


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 14, 2014)

Scotland v England friendly to be played on 18th Nov (at Parkhead)  Now given England's efforts of the last few weeks what wiill happen on the 18th Sept. that will be interesting.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Deary me, I did not reply as I thought that most UK citizens had sorted that one out out years ago.
		
Click to expand...

So which illegal war was last fought then so i can let you know if NATO involvement happened ?


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So which illegal war was last fought then so i can let you know if NATO involvement happened ?
		
Click to expand...

Me thinks your wasting your time as there hasn't been one.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 14, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Scotland v England friendly to be played on 18th Nov (at Parkhead)  Now given England's efforts of the last few weeks what wiill happen on the 18th Sept. that will be interesting.
		
Click to expand...

I suppose at least England have been somewhere to add another stamp to their passport. What's happening on the 18 Sept then.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So which illegal war was last fought then so i can let you know if NATO involvement happened ?
		
Click to expand...

You are not dragging me into that one as there are a lot of ex services guys on hear who I totally respect.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You are not dragging me into that one as there are a lot of ex services guys on hear who I totally respect.
		
Click to expand...

I wasnt dragging you into anything - i asked you to clarify a comment that you made about illegal wars - here it is just in case you forgot



Doon frae Troon said:



			I don't think NATO were involved in any illegal wars.
		
Click to expand...

So can you tell me which illegal wars you dont think NATO were involved.

Remember this all stems from a comment that Scotland wouldnt be involved in any illegal wars if they were independant


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I wasnt dragging you into anything - i asked you to clarify a comment that you made about illegal wars - here it is just in case you forgot



So can you tell me which illegal wars you dont think NATO were involved.

Remember this all stems from a comment that Scotland wouldnt be involved in any illegal wars if they were independant
		
Click to expand...

It may be easier if you could elaborate on what defines an illegal war.   In Your Opinion of course?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 14, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			It may be easier if you could elaborate on what defines an illegal war.   In Your Opinion of course?
		
Click to expand...

I wasnt the one that mention it hence why im waiting for the response.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I wasnt the one that mention it hence why im waiting for the response.
		
Click to expand...

You asked the question so its not unreasonable for you to be asked to clarify it.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 14, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			It may be easier if you could elaborate on what defines an illegal war.   In Your Opinion of course?
		
Click to expand...

Given that the reference was a quote, there's really no need to do so!

And there has certainly been a recent 'legal' war that turned out to be based on a lie - as a leading expert, subsequently driven to suicide by 'the machine' had already told them! Something I will never forgive Blair for causing!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 14, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			You asked the question so its not unreasonable for you to be asked to clarify it.
		
Click to expand...

The question was asking for clarification from the person that brought up the illegal wars


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 14, 2014)

There are lies based upon deliberate manipulation of evidence to an end - and there are actions based upon incorrect analysis of the evidence and assessment of the risk.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 14, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Given that the reference was a quote, there's really no need to do so!

And there has certainly been a recent 'legal' war that turned out to be based on a lie - as a leading expert, subsequently driven to suicide by 'the machine' had already told them! Something I will never forgive Blair for causing!
		
Click to expand...

I would like to understand what criteria defines a war as illegal.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jul 14, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			I would like to understand what criteria defines a war as illegal.
		
Click to expand...

Quote frome research on the web:

"According to current international law, a war is illegal except when one of the following applies.....
a. It is in accordance with a UN resolution to go to war when all other options have broken down;
b. It is in self-defence (i.e. a country has been attacked)
c. A war needs to be formally declared by a sovereign state after all negotiations have broken down (eg. 3/9/1939, Britain and France legally stated that a state of war existed between them and Germany since Germany had invaded Poland illegally and refused to withdraw).


Also, what politicians like to do nowadays is to call what is a naked act of aggression or an unwarranted invasion a "war" in order to give it some sort of legitimacy. 


Thus.... 
the US-led attack on Afghanistan in 2003 was ILLEGAL;
the US-led invasion of Iraq is and was ILLEGAL;
the Israeli onslaught upon Gaza is and was ILLEGAL.


Whilst....
Britain's limited war with Argentina was legal as it was undertaken to repel an illegal invasion;
The Allied response to Saddam Hussain's invasion of Kuwait was legal as it was in defence of a sovereign state which requested help to repel a foreign invader."


----------



## Val (Jul 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Phil, the polls are all over the place, nobody in Scotland takes any notice of them.

We do sometime tell little porkies to the pollsters just to keep them on their toes.

The last Scottish election should have been be a good indicator.
		
Click to expand...

Why would it be? It would bear no relation. The last election counted seats the referendum will count heads.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 14, 2014)

And NATO were involved in both Afghan and Iraq


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 14, 2014)

I think Israel argues that they are merely acting in self-defence - and there is enough bombardment of Israeli territory to back that up.

The fact that the 'retaliation' appears out of all proportion to the threat makes no difference - especially with US as an 'ally'!

Blair's great exercise of legitimising joining Bush's 'mission' was pure PR! That conflict was demonstrably illegal - if in a good cause!

I does also mean that the 'illegal' in the quote was valid.


----------



## Foxholer (Jul 14, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Why would it be? It would bear no relation. The last election counted seats the referendum will count heads.
		
Click to expand...

The Polls were vastly different to the results! Which is what Doon's point was - though I think they are more accurate this time.


----------



## Val (Jul 14, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			The Polls were vastly different to the results! Which is what Doon's point was - though I think they are more accurate this time.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe I read it wrong then, i read it as we should look at the last election as a guide to how it will go this time which in hindsight is even more nonsense than i first thought.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 15, 2014)

I was pointing out that in the last Scottish election not one poll in Scotland indicated an overall majority for the SNP.


----------



## Val (Jul 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I was pointing out that in the last Scottish election not one poll in Scotland indicated an overall majority for the SNP.
		
Click to expand...

Which is a fair point, however they did point to an SNP win, they rarely get it completely wrong.

Time will tell, not long now.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

There seems to be a degree of antagonism being driven here by exforces personnel over the last page.

I think the war in Iraq was illegal as it was started based on a lie.I don't think anyone apportions any of that blame of the men and woman who went and fought and died there, only the politicians, of any party or nation, who sent them there under false pretense. 

I also think the war in Afghanistan was based on flimsy reasoning too.No co incidence that both countries attacked have massive natural resources imo.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There seems to be a degree of antagonism being driven here by exforces personnel over the last page.

I think the war in Iraq was illegal as it was started based on a lie.I don't think anyone apportions any of that blame of the men and woman who went and fought and died there, only the politicians, of any party or nation, who sent them there under false pretense. 

I also think the war in Afghanistan was based on flimsy reasoning too.No co incidence that both countries attacked have massive natural resources imo.
		
Click to expand...

Actually what started it was a remark that if Scotland were Independant then they wouldn't have taken part in illegal wars 

I asked what if they were part of NATO to which the response from Doon was - NATO don't take part on illegal wars to which I asked what were the latest illegal wars so I can tell him if NATO were involved 

Whether Iraq or Afghan were legal etc was something I was discussing - it was more the flippant remark about Scotland not being involved in illegal wars etc


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Actually what started it was a remark that if Scotland were Independant then they wouldn't have taken part in illegal wars 

I asked what if they were part of NATO to which the response from Doon was - NATO don't take part on illegal wars to which I asked what were the latest illegal wars so I can tell him if NATO were involved 

Whether Iraq or Afghan were legal etc was something I was discussing - it was more the flippant remark about Scotland not being involved in illegal wars etc
		
Click to expand...

I'd hope Scotland weren't involved in any wars tbh, unless someone actually tried to invade Scotland.Works well for countries of comparable size like Iceland/Costa Rica.I'd honestly like Scotland to have no military, but realise my views on promoting humanitarian work instead of military might is seen as naive on these boards, so no point in following that thread.

I think any country invading any other country should be illegal, whether that's Nazi Germany,Galtieri Argentina or Blair UK.Arming yourself with a weapon that can take a life then specifically seeking out another person to carry out that threat is, to me, the ultimate level of insanity/evil.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'd hope Scotland weren't involved in any wars tbh, unless someone actually tried to invade Scotland.Works well for countries of comparable size like Iceland/Costa Rica.I'd honestly like Scotland to have no military, but realise my views on promoting humanitarian work instead of military might is seen as naive on these boards, so no point in following that thread.

I think any country invading any other country should be illegal, whether that's Nazi Germany,Galtieri Argentina or Blair UK.Arming yourself with a weapon that can take a life then specifically seeking out another person to carry out that threat is, to me, the ultimate level of insanity/evil.
		
Click to expand...

Scotland will be a part of NATO if they get independence and as such will take part in NATO exercises etc etc  

It is impossible for Scotland to have no military

Oh and Iceland have had a presence in both Iraq and Afghan


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Scotland will be a part of NATO if they get independence and as such will take part in NATO exercises etc etc  

It is impossible for Scotland to have no military

Oh and Iceland have had a presence in both Iraq and Afghan
		
Click to expand...

Nothing is impossible, as Iceland shows.They have no Army, are part of NATO and have members of The Icelandic Peacekeeping Guard in Afghanistan.

So you assertion that Scotland having no military is impossible I'd have to disagree with.Unlikely, yes.Impossible, no.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Nothing is impossible, as Iceland shows.They have no Army, are part of NATO and have members of The Icelandic Peacekeeping Guard in Afghanistan.

So you assertion that Scotland having no military is impossible I'd have to disagree with.Unlikely, yes.Impossible, no.
		
Click to expand...

Iceland isn't part of an island with other countries that do have military presence and Scotland will never ever be daft enough to leave their borders open and get rid of all those current serving Scottish military. Scotland isn't Iceland unless you detach it and move it thousands of miles away in the middle of nowhere providing zero strategic benefit to anyone 

So yes it is impossible in the world we live in today


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Iceland isn't part of an island with other countries that do have military presence and Scotland will never ever be daft enough to leave their borders open and get rid of all those current serving Scottish military. Scotland isn't Iceland unless you detach it and move it thousands of miles away in the middle of nowhere providing zero strategic benefit to anyone 

So yes it is impossible in the world we live in today
		
Click to expand...

I know you refuse to back down once you've decided on your point of view so I'll not keep going with this (I'm not sure why I indulge you at all on this thread considering your opinion counts for zero when alls said and done) but because rUK wants to continue to spend money militarising themselves it doesn't follow that Scotland would need to.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I know you refuse to back down once you've decided on your point of view so I'll not keep going with this (I'm not sure why I indulge you at all on this thread considering your opinion counts for zero when alls said and done) but because rUK wants to continue to spend money militarising themselves it doesn't follow that Scotland would need to.
		
Click to expand...

So only Scottish people living in Scotland's opinion counts then ?

Actually I believe the possible independence ( well not really possible ) has an effect on the whole of the UK so our opinion is valid 

But thankfully it's looking like it won't happen anyway.

But would be interested to know what your plans would be for those thousands of jobless scottish military people and obviously MOD that you would make redundant


----------



## Val (Jul 15, 2014)

It's naive to think an independent scotland can have no military force


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So only people living in Scotland's opinion counts then ?
		
Click to expand...

Obviously.



Valentino said:



			It's naive to think an independent scotland can have no military force
		
Click to expand...

Probably, but to say it's impossible is incorrect.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So only Scottish people living in Scotland's opinion counts then ?
		
Click to expand...

Not exactly.

Only people, of any nationality, who are registered to vote in Scotland. And David Bowie, of course!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Obviously.



Probably, but to say it's impossible is incorrect.
		
Click to expand...

I'm going to suggest that everyone in the UK's opinion counts as it effects us all but only the people living in Scotland - regardless of nationality have a vote that counts.

So about these forces and mod civil servants that you make jobless - what work are they going to do then ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I'm going to suggest that everyone in the UK's opinion counts as it effects us all but only the people living in Scotland - regardless of nationality have a vote that counts.

So about these forces and mod civil servants that you make jobless - what work are they going to do then ?
		
Click to expand...

I don't think your opinion counts, it's not valid in this debate, it carries no weight, whatever you may think makes no difference.

As for the forces and mod civil servants...aren't they all employed by the current UK govt?I'm pretty sure you've been at pains to point out Scotland has no armed forces anyway, so that's a problem for rUK, is it not?Any army Scotland decides to have would actually be job creation...whether that job creation comes at the expense at the ever decreasing rUK military forces or elsewhere makes no odds to iScotland...we'd be creating jobs...like creating a maritime security service, patrolling our outstanding natural resources of fish/oil/gas, safe guarding our energy rich shores...hey, we'd need ships for all that, thank heavens we have the largest ship building zone on these islands.We'd maybe even start to do some good humanitarian ships or maybe a larger merchant navy.

All those that want to continue serving rUK I'm sure will be welcomed...until the next round of cuts to fund wmds.

As for civil servants, we'll need plenty more of them, plus imagine the value and expansion in Edinburgh...all those embassies, all those countries setting up here.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It's naive to think an independent scotland can have no military force
		
Click to expand...

The military force it would have have could easily be along the lines of The New Zealand Defence Force and with a similar remit.  And with a population of 4.5million it's equivalent to Scotland's - so any military force would be similarly affordable.

Though A2D would have this comment as irrelevant as I don't have a vote - though since I can directly influence voters (in my family) does that mean that my views actually DO count - just a little.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I don't think your opinion counts, it's not valid in this debate, it carries no weight, whatever you may think makes no difference.

As for the forces and mod civil servants...aren't they all employed by the current UK govt?I'm pretty sure you've been at pains to point out Scotland has no armed forces anyway, so that's a problem for rUK, is it not?Any army Scotland decides to have would actually be job creation...whether that job creation comes at the expense at the ever decreasing rUK military forces or elsewhere makes no odds to iScotland...we'd be creating jobs...like creating a maritime security service, patrolling our outstanding natural resources of fish/oil/gas, safe guarding our energy rich shores...hey, we'd need ships for all that, thank heavens we have the largest ship building zone on these islands.We'd maybe even start to do some good humanitarian ships or maybe a larger merchant navy.

All those that want to continue serving rUK I'm sure will be welcomed...until the next round of cuts to fund wmds.

As for civil servants, we'll need plenty more of them, plus imagine the value and expansion in Edinburgh...all those embassies, all those countries setting up here.
		
Click to expand...


Well I guess as my opinion doesn't count it won't matter if I'm telling you that you are living in a fantasy cloud cuckoo land 

It's truely amazing how within the current climate of the world that path is rich flourishing nation is just going to emerge from the shackles of the UK. I think you actually believe it can happen - I think you have told yourself it enough you know believe it to be true 

Currently a good percentages of the UK's military reside in Scotland - you don't want a military so out they all go taking with them all those jobs that a military establishment creates for the local community , along with your navy shipbuilding business and the employees because let's not forget those contracts are for the UK military. So you want to create a maritime security patrol ( *cough* Navy ) - now to do that obviously you could use the personnel from the navy ships stationed around Scotland but you have kicked them out of course - so you could create new jobs - better pay than the Royal Navy ? More funding required for that I'm guessing - I wonder what's to stop Russia drilling in the North Sea whilst you create this "Maritime Security Patrol" ( Navy ) or what's to stop foreign fishermen coming in and stocking up from oh our vast fish supplies ( believe they are restricted ) 

And embassies ? aren't Embassies normally manned by the country whose embassy it is - and can you really see many countries setting up an Embassy in Scotland ? For what purpose would they shell out all that money when they have a perfectly good one in London ? 

So it's good to see you have thought it all through and have the negatives and positives all weighed up and have the cost implications involved and the upheaval and off course your military navy ( sorry maritime security patrol ) all sorted. Think it would make a great white paper and would certainly bridge that very big gap between the no and the yes vote ( 30% for the yes vote 61% for the no vote according to the radio this morning )


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Well I guess as my opinion doesn't count it won't matter if I'm telling you that you are living in a fantasy cloud cuckoo land 

It's truely amazing how within the current climate of the world that path is rich flourishing nation is just going to emerge from the shackles of the UK. I think you actually believe it can happen - I think you have told yourself it enough you know believe it to be true 

Currently a good percentages of the UK's military reside in Scotland - you don't want a military so out they all go taking with them all those jobs that a military establishment creates for the local community , along with your navy shipbuilding business and the employees because let's not forget those contracts are for the UK military. So you want to create a maritime security patrol ( *cough* Navy ) - now to do that obviously you could use the personnel from the navy ships stationed around Scotland but you have kicked them out of course - so you could create new jobs - better pay than the Royal Navy ? More funding required for that I'm guessing - I wonder what's to stop Russia drilling in the North Sea whilst you create this "Maritime Security Patrol" ( Navy ) or what's to stop foreign fishermen coming in and stocking up from oh our vast fish supplies ( believe they are restricted ) 

And embassies ? aren't Embassies normally manned by the country whose embassy it is - and can you really see many countries setting up an Embassy in Scotland ? For what purpose would they shell out all that money when they have a perfectly good one in London ? 

So it's good to see you have thought it all through and have the negatives and positives all weighed up and have the cost implications involved and the upheaval and off course your military navy ( sorry maritime security patrol ) all sorted. Think it would make a great white paper and would certainly bridge that very big gap between the no and the yes vote ( 30% for the yes vote 61% for the no vote according to the radio this morning )
		
Click to expand...

Awesome.I'm sure you think all of this is correct, and some of it might be based on reality, but I think some of what you think ( on any subject I've seen you contribute to on this forum) is just dumb in the extreme.

Carry on speculating on something you have no control over.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Though A2D would have this comment as irrelevant as I don't have a vote - though since I can directly influence voters (in my family) does that mean that my views actually DO count - just a little.
		
Click to expand...

If your family has to rely on the advise/opinion of someone living in Surrey, more fool them, whatever way they vote.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Awesome.I'm sure you think all of this is correct, and some of it might be based on reality, but I think some of what you think ( on any subject I've seen you contribute to on this forum) is just dumb in the extreme.

*Carry on speculating on something you have no control over.*

Click to expand...

My speculation has the exact same place as yours :thup:

I'm dumb - you live a fantasy world - what a pair we are then 

Only thing you have control over is the ability to vote yes or no right now - if Scotland wanted WMDs you wouldn't have a say , if Scotland wanted military you wouldn't have a say 

Just like everyone else in the UK - you will vote for promises - the reality is always a world away. 

Thankfully it's looking like it's all immaterial


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 15, 2014)

The thing is that I believe that the opinion of those of us south of the border *does *actually matter.  

If enough with a vote believe that a NO will bring a devo max nirvana - the best of both worlds with cream on top - then perhaps BT and Cameron/Clegg/Miliband/Farage et al should spell out a bit clearer what this nirvana will mean financially to those of us south of the border.  

For if I were to hear that this nirvana for a BT Scotland is going to cost me Â£xxx a year - then I might well say to my MP - You can forget that Jeremy - put that lot in place for Scotland at that cost to my pocket and you ain't getting my vote.  And his self-preservation instinct will kick in.  

So someone - how much is devo max for a BT Scotland going to cost me - someone - anyone?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If your family has to rely on the advise/opinion of someone living in Surrey, more fool them, whatever way they vote.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not saying they would rely on it - but my mother (mid-80s) might well listen to me as in the not too distant future she might be relying on me.  As might my younger sister for different reasons.  This is where the decision about my not getting a vote is wrong.  I can see and agree with many of reasons for not giving me a vote - but to suggest that I will not be directly affected by the outcome is just incorrect - it is wrong.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			then perhaps BT and Cameron/Clegg/Miliband/Farage et al should spell out a bit clearer what this nirvana will mean financially to those of us south of the border.
		
Click to expand...

Oh that's easy... For those south of the border it will mean take to all fours and brace yourself!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 15, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Oh that's easy... For those south of the border it will mean take to all fours and brace yourself!
		
Click to expand...

...and you will be happy for that to happen? 

Because lots of promises said and imagined seem to be heading the way of voters in the referendum - and more will be heading that way over the coming two months.  Polls in Scotland seem to suggest a strengthening in the NO vote on the grounds of devo max being a 'likelihood' - is it - dunno?  Certainly BT don't seem to be that keen to quash such speculation.  

And so what will devo max mean to the rest of us?  Maybe we should be told so we can tell our representatives in Westminster whether or not the cost to us of devo max is acceptable.  But I am not holding my breath in waiting.


----------



## Val (Jul 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The thing is that I believe that the opinion of those of us south of the border *does *actually matter.  

If enough with a vote believe that a NO will bring a devo max nirvana - the best of both worlds with cream on top - then perhaps BT and Cameron/Clegg/Miliband/Farage et al should spell out a bit clearer what this nirvana will mean financially to those of us south of the border.  

For if I were to hear that this nirvana for a BT Scotland is going to cost me Â£xxx a year - then I might well say to my MP - You can forget that Jeremy - put that lot in place for Scotland at that cost to my pocket and you ain't getting my vote.  And his self-preservation instinct will kick in.  

So someone - how much is devo max for a BT Scotland going to cost me - someone - anyone?
		
Click to expand...

Devo max at present is not on the table.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Devo max at present is not on the table.
		
Click to expand...

And so some voters are indicating that they will vote NO on the basis of something that is not (yet) going to happen.  Have BT and/or Westminster said that devo max is categorically not on the table?


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and you will be happy for that to happen?
		
Click to expand...




Valentino said:



			Devo max at present is not on the table.
		
Click to expand...


As Valentino points out its not on the table [at present]... And [hopefully] unlikely to be so...


Worst possible case for rUK [using 'our' new moniker]... In the event of it coming about would make retirement to the East Neuk look even more inviting ...


----------



## ger147 (Jul 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And so some voters are indicating that they will vote NO on the basis of something that is not (yet) going to happen. Have BT and/or Westminster said that devo max is categorically not on the table?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, David Cameron did when he ruled out its inclusion in the vote.  It's Yes or No to Independence on the ballot paper, nothing else.

Whatever may or may not come afterwards is just the normal political bluff/bluster, NOTHING else is officially on the table at the moment post-referendum.


----------



## Val (Jul 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And so some voters are indicating that they will vote NO on the basis of something that is not (yet) going to happen.  Have BT and/or Westminster said that devo max is categorically not on the table?
		
Click to expand...

It's not on the ballot paper, the vote is independence or not, there is no carrot to vote no


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It's not on the ballot paper, the vote is independence or not, there is no carrot to vote no
		
Click to expand...

So anyone from Camp BT or indeed anywhere else who suggests that devo max might come along is being somewhat disingenuous and voters should simply take as FACT that devo max is not going to happen in the near or middle distance.  And so any who vote NO on basis of any devo max expectations are deluded.  

I have to suggest though that not having DM as an option on the voting paper does not in itself rule it out as a future for Scotland.  Or maybe it does - no harm in someone from BT or Westminster just reiterating that fact - just in case there are any deluded souls out there.  After all - the polls suggest that there are.


----------



## Val (Jul 15, 2014)

SILH, are you being deliberately obtuse? 

Right now, 100% fact, devo max is not on the table, voters can only deal in fact. I cannot see why you cannot and do not grasp this.

Anything else is hope or speculation.


----------



## NWJocko (Jul 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			SILH, are you being deliberately obtuse? 

Right now, 100% fact, devo max is not on the table, voters can only deal in fact. I cannot see why you cannot and do not grasp this.

Anything else is hope or speculation.
		
Click to expand...

He's been struggling for 78 pages of this thread......  :temper:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			SILH, are you being deliberately obtuse? 

Right now, 100% fact, devo max is not on the table, voters can only deal in fact. I cannot see why you cannot and do not grasp this.

Anything else is hope or speculation.
		
Click to expand...

I grasp it fine - but some voters seem to think that DM IS an option that a NO will bring about in time.  If it's not then BT just have to make sure that voters understand that fact.  What is wrong with asking them to do that?  Or is it that by not being so explicit some voters might still think it's on the cards and so vote NO.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			SILH, are you being deliberately obtuse? 

Right now, 100% fact, devo max is not on the table, voters can only deal in fact. I cannot see why you cannot and do not grasp this.

Anything else is hope or speculation.
		
Click to expand...

It can't be denied that both Labour and Conservative have both confirmed that additional powers, or the road to devo max, is being dangled infront of the electorate to help the No vote, can it?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It can't be denied that both Labour and Conservative have both confirmed that additional powers, or the road to devo max, is being dangled infront of the electorate to help the No vote, can it?
		
Click to expand...

I think both sides are dangling their intangibles before the electorate....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It can't be denied that both Labour and Conservative have both confirmed that additional powers, or the road to devo max, is being dangled infront of the electorate to help the No vote, can it?
		
Click to expand...

Thankyou, thankyou A2D...


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I think both sides are dangling their intangibles before the electorate.... 

Click to expand...

The SNP are offering a political view of how they, as a party, see Scotland after any YES win.Both the Labour and Conservative parties are offering certain additional powers to Holyrood if we vote NO.

So, The SNPs vision is obviously flawed to a degree, but we don't have vote them in.Westminster are nodding and winking saying, vote NO and get more powers, but what powers?If there is a desire to have more power in Holyrood, why not vote YES? 

Which brings me back to a question I've asked many times before.Why is Westminster so keen to keep Scotland in the union?WE're told Scotland has the best of both worlds financially, so using that logic we'd be worse off independent, yes?Which also means The UK is providing more than our fair share to finance Scotland, yes?*So why, if we're a financial burden, does Westminster/BT want to keep Scotland?* No one has answered me that question.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 15, 2014)

Ach well, I thought it was funny.....


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



*So why, if we're a financial burden, does Westminster/BT want to keep Scotland?* No one has answered me that question.
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps for the same reasons that some, such as myself, want to stay in the union and couldn't care less whether we were better or worse off financially as a result.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

Have Westminster said that Scotland are a financial burden or is it a case of 2+2=5


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Perhaps for the same reasons that some, such as myself, want to stay in the union and couldn't care less whether we were better or worse off financially as a result.
		
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I'd pay more tax to be independent.Finances aren't driving me either.But they are the bedrock of both sides.BT tell us we're financially better off as part of the union, the best of both worlds.If we're better off as part of the union, we must cost the UK...so why so keen to keep us?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Don't get me wrong, I'd pay more tax to be independent.Finances aren't driving me either.But they are the bedrock of both sides.BT tell us we're financially better off as part of the union, the best of both worlds.If we're better off as part of the union, we must cost the UK...so why so keen to keep us?
		
Click to expand...

Just playing devil's advocate on this one, as I really can't answer your question, but isn't there a possibility that both Scotland and rUK combined are stronger than the sum of their parts if they were separate?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jul 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Just playing devil's advocate on this one, as I really can't answer your question, but isn't there a possibility that both Scotland and rUK combined are stronger than the sum of their parts if they were separate?
		
Click to expand...


Think that possibility is very high hence why I believe a NO will happen and not just stronger financially


----------



## Val (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It can't be denied that both Labour and Conservative have both confirmed that additional powers, or the road to devo max, is being dangled infront of the electorate to help the No vote, can it?
		
Click to expand...

But it's not guaranteed, dangle all they like the fact of the matter right now is it's not in the table, all that's been said is they'd consider it. 

That is the big difference that seems to be missed by some.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			But it's not guaranteed, dangle all they like the fact of the matter right now is it's not in the table, all that's been said is they'd consider it. 

That is the big difference that seems to be missed by some.
		
Click to expand...

They're just playing politics - those damned politicians!!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			But it's not guaranteed, dangle all they like the fact of the matter right now is it's not in the table, all that's been said is they'd consider it. 

That is the big difference that seems to be missed by some.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed.They're just as likely to remove powers from Holyrood.


----------



## Val (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Indeed.They're just as likely to remove powers from Holyrood.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely, hence why I've bleated on about discounting devo max, it cannot be part of the equation unless guaranteed after a NO vote.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 15, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Absolutely, hence why I've bleated on about discounting devo max, it cannot be part of the equation unless guaranteed after a NO vote.
		
Click to expand...

Impossible now. BT have blatantly played that card after Cameron refused to allow it on the card.So BT refuse to allow it on the card THEN muddy the waters by agreeing to some sort of devo max.Then BT demand clarity and specifics from YES.Both sides are guilty of politiking, but BT have learned their craft at the alter of it all..Westminster.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Impossible now. BT have blatantly played that card after Cameron refused to allow it on the card.So BT refuse to allow it on the card THEN muddy the waters by agreeing to some sort of devo max.Then BT demand clarity and specifics from YES.Both sides are guilty of politiking, but BT have learned their craft at the alter of it all..Westminster.
		
Click to expand...

To imply that one set of politicians is lying more than the other set with regards to this whole debate, is being very one sided in my opinion.

Until proved otherwise, they are both lying, and guilty of "politiking", to equal amounts. It's what they do.

Just the one thought, when you refer to why rUK might want to retain Scotland despite the financial burden, is the belief of power in numbers, in my opinion. They likely feel they will hold more weight in international negotiations, with more people. 

Oh, and because if Scotland goes, Cornwall might start bleating about being a seperate country, and I like cornish pasties too much for that.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 15, 2014)

That is my dilemma.
I am in favor of Devo Max but can't vote for it.
Do I take a punt on the Nats or do I trust a Tory Government when it comes to Scotland ?

I think I might just abstain.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jul 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That is my dilemma.
I am in favor of Devo Max but can't vote for it.
Do I take a punt on the Nats or do I trust a Tory Government when it comes to Scotland ?

I think I might just abstain.
		
Click to expand...

But Devo Max isn't an option.

Forget Devo Max. 

Would you want to be independent, or would you want to be part of the UK. Devo Max may or may not happen, and therefore (no matter what the politicians hint, or imply, or suggest, or "nudge nudge wink wink) it shouldn't come into your thinking.

My prediction:

Scotland will vote NO, as a lot of people bank on Devo Max, and when in 5 years nothing has been done, it comes around full circle, and people complain, and want a referendum on Devo Max or not.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Do I take a punt on the Nats or do I trust a Tory Government when it comes to Scotland ?
		
Click to expand...

It's just unfortunate that your obsessed with Tory as the Government or are you writing off the others. Remember, we get the Torys in to do the unpopular things to fix what the other clowns cock up and then we vote the clowns in again.

Why is it all about the Torys.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 15, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			It's just unfortunate that your obsessed with Tory as the Government or are you writing off the others. Remember, we get the Torys in to do the unpopular things to fix what the other clowns cock up and then we vote the clowns in again.

Why is it all about the Torys.
		
Click to expand...

They will align with The Kippers to rule England for many years.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jul 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They will align with The Kippers to rule England for many years.
		
Click to expand...

See, you've shown your true cards as a WUM with that post DfT! You've clearly referred to it as England when you know that will wind people up.... very clever.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 15, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			See, you've shown your true cards as a WUM with that post DfT! You've clearly referred to it as England when you know that will wind people up.... very clever.
		
Click to expand...

That's what happens when you debate with Republicans.


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 15, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The SNP are offering a political view of how they, as a party, see Scotland after any YES win.Both the Labour and Conservative parties are offering certain additional powers to Holyrood if we vote NO.

So, The SNPs vision is obviously flawed to a degree, but we don't have vote them in.Westminster are nodding and winking saying, vote NO and get more powers, but what powers?If there is a desire to have more power in Holyrood, why not vote YES? 


Which brings me back to a question I've asked many times before.Why is Westminster so keen to keep Scotland in the union?WE're told Scotland has the best of both worlds financially, so using that logic we'd be worse off independent, yes?Which also means The UK is providing more than our fair share to finance Scotland, yes?*So why, if we're a financial burden, does Westminster/BT want to keep Scotland?* No one has answered me that question.
		
Click to expand...

IMO its because they believe the UK as it stands is the best overall option for these Isles and don't want us divided.   It's not all about finances by any means, I think you already understand that though.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 15, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			But Devo Max isn't an option.

Forget Devo Max. 

Would you want to be independent, or would you want to be part of the UK. Devo Max may or may not happen, and therefore (no matter what the politicians hint, or imply, or suggest, or "nudge nudge wink wink) it shouldn't come into your thinking.

My prediction:

Scotland will vote NO, as a lot of people bank on Devo Max, and when in 5 years nothing has been done, it comes around full circle, and people complain, and want a referendum on Devo Max or not.
		
Click to expand...

...and when in 10yrs time Westminster still refuses calls for a referendum on devo Max then what?

Not on cards now and potentially unacceptable to rest of UK in future - UDI?


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and when in 10yrs time Westminster still refuses calls for a referendum on devo Max then what?

Not on cards now and potentially unacceptable to rest of UK in future - UDI?
		
Click to expand...

Who knows what form of Government will be in power in a decade and what their views may be.   England may want devo max by then.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That is my dilemma.
I am in favor of Devo Max but can't vote for it.
Do I take a punt on the Nats or do I trust a Tory Government when it comes to Scotland ?

I think I might just abstain.
		
Click to expand...

Well..... If we vote YES you definitely won't get devo max, if we vote NO you might get it one day.... Maybe. But don't hold your breath.....


----------



## 2blue (Jul 15, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			It's just unfortunate that your obsessed with Tory as the Government or are you writing off the others. Remember, we get the Torys in to do the unpopular things to fix what the other clowns cock up and then we vote the clowns in again.

Why is it all about the Torys.
		
Click to expand...

Oh no Scotland.....  please don't leave us with the Kippers & Dail Mail believing Tory Nutters. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



*So why, if we're a financial burden, does Westminster/BT want to keep Scotland?* No one has answered me that question.
		
Click to expand...


Because their mates, in business, are not liking the look of a socialist left wing independent Scotland... Not good for business... Workers with rights can't be having that....


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 16, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Because their mates, in business, are not liking the look of a socialist left wing independent Scotland... Not good for business... Workers with rights can't be having that....
		
Click to expand...


Have you considered North Korea?


----------



## 2blue (Jul 16, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Have you considered North Korea?
		
Click to expand...

WHAT!!!!......  and join the Crazy Club with all those Kippers & Mail reading Tory nutters


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 16, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Because their mates, in business, are not liking the look of a socialist left wing independent Scotland... Not good for business... Workers with rights can't be having that....
		
Click to expand...

If you think The SNP are close to be being socialist you've not been paying attention.If you think Scottish Labour are close to being socialist step away from the crack pipe.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 16, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			See, you've shown your true cards as a WUM with that post DfT! You've clearly referred to it as England when you know that will wind people up.... very clever.
		
Click to expand...

60 million votes in England about 5 million in rrUK........England rUK it is the same.

In the present UK Yorkshire can out vote Scotland.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 16, 2014)

2blue said:



			Oh no Scotland.....  please don't leave us with the Kippers & Dail Mail believing Tory Nutters. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
		
Click to expand...

A worry if it were true.

The Daily Mail does not have a monopoly on Nutters. 

There are plenty of those reading the Mirror (all believing that everything from the economy to global warming and the failure of England at the World Cup is the fault of some Old Etonian) and the Guardian whose readers seem to have a conspiracy theory to fit every situation.

Still we could always have the Two Edded Monster Raving Loonies.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In the present UK Yorkshire can out vote Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Shame they havnt got the vote for an iscot.  Yes for certain would win.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			60 million votes in England about 5 million in rrUK........England rUK it is the same.

In the present UK Yorkshire can out vote Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

You never let figures get in the way of your arguments do you.

According to the ONS there were, in 2012, just under 46.5 million voters in the UK as a whole.

Somehow I don't think there has been that big a population explosion in the intervening two years.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 16, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			You never let figures get in the way of your arguments do you.

According to the ONS there were, in 2012, just under 46.5 million voters in the UK as a whole.

Somehow I don't think there has been that big a population explosion in the intervening two years.
		
Click to expand...

You do know that quoting facts to the Yes campaign is a bit like walking through treacle or trying to read the rules threads.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 16, 2014)

Yorkshire & Humber 2014 Euro Election

33% Turnout 1.3m votes cast.  So about 4m voters.  Lot more voters than you'll find in Scotland.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu-regions/E15000003


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 16, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Have you considered North Korea?
		
Click to expand...


 Not quite sure what a military dictatorship has to do with socialism....


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If you think The SNP are close to be being socialist you've not been paying attention.If you think Scottish Labour are close to being socialist step away from the crack pipe.
		
Click to expand...

Didn't ...............

Been paying attention enough to consider SNP's real 'prize' would be devomax.... Therefore making Doons day....


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 16, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Didn't ...............

Been paying attention enough to consider SNP's real 'prize' would be devomax.... Therefore making Doons day....
		
Click to expand...

With the greatest of respect, I believe you may have made an error with the first sentence.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 16, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			You never let figures get in the way of your arguments do you.

According to the ONS there were, in 2012, just under 46.5 million voters in the UK as a whole.

Somehow I don't think there has been that big a population explosion in the intervening two years.
		
Click to expand...

Yup sorry...I was going on population.
Still big numbers.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 16, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



 Not quite sure what a dictatorship has to do with socialism....
		
Click to expand...

Then a look back in history may help.  Remember, all men are equal, but some are more equal than others.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 16, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



 Not quite sure what a military dictatorship has to do with socialism....
		
Click to expand...

Ask Mao or Stalin or Hitler then.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 16, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Didn't ...............

Been paying attention enough to consider SNP's real 'prize' would be devomax.... Therefore making Doons day....
		
Click to expand...

Aye, Cameron might have made the biggest blunder in the history of British politics.Devo Max would have skooshed any vote and The SNP would have bitten his hand off for it on the paper, but the arrogance and assumption YES/NO would crush the nationalist movement was badly miscalculated.I know most folk on here think NO will win by a significant majority but I'd get ready for a surprise, especially with appointments like the lassie Priti Patel...she's on record for demanding Scotlands funding gets reduced.

As much as most folk (including me) dislike Salmond, watch him gear up in the next couple of months.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jul 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Ask Mao or Stalin or Hitler then.
		
Click to expand...


...


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 16, 2014)

What would happen to Salmond and the SNP after a no vote ( if it happens) does he and his party have any standing left in Scotland and he stands under a banner that was rejected? Although I appreciate that Scotland would need another party, should it be the SNP?


----------



## Val (Jul 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			60 million votes in England about 5 million in rrUK........England rUK it is the same.

In the present UK Yorkshire can out vote Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Really? How many MP's are there in Yorkshire?



SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yorkshire & Humber 2014 Euro Election

33% Turnout 1.3m votes cast.  So about 4m voters.  Lot more voters than you'll find in Scotland.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu-regions/E15000003

Click to expand...

Which doesn't mean that much really, Yorkshire is more densely populated area. So how many MP's does Yorkshire have.

Once you get your answers fellas, tell me again how Yorkshire can out vote Scotland?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			What would happen to Salmond and the SNP after a no vote ( if it happens) does he and his party have any standing left in Scotland and he stands under a banner that was rejected? Although I appreciate that Scotland would need another party, should it be the SNP?
		
Click to expand...


I keep saying this, but the only way to get rid of Salmond and The SNP is to vote yes.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I keep saying this, but the only way to get rid of Salmond and The SNP is to vote yes.
		
Click to expand...

Does that not give him much needed platform.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 16, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Really? How many MP's are there in Yorkshire?



Which doesn't mean that much really, Yorkshire is more densely populated area. So how many MP's does Yorkshire have.

Once you get your answers fellas, tell me again how Yorkshire can out vote Scotland?
		
Click to expand...


Was only providing some numbers of voters


----------



## Val (Jul 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I keep saying this, but the only way to get rid of Salmond and The SNP is to vote yes.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately this is true however Salmond won't be around forever and a resounding no _MAY_ quieten independence talk for another generation 

Lesser of 2 evils


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Does that not give him much needed platform.
		
Click to expand...

Not if the SNP don't win the first Independent Scotland General Election


----------



## Val (Jul 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Was only providing some numbers of voters
		
Click to expand...

Which is irrelevant in the context of Yorkshire out voting Scotland, if individual counted then I'd agree but they don't.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 16, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Which is irrelevant in the context of Yorkshire out voting Scotland, if individual counted then I'd agree but they don't.
		
Click to expand...

I know that - just providing numbers in the context of an earlier post on numbers


----------



## 2blue (Jul 16, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			A worry if it were true.

The Daily Mail does not have a monopoly on Nutters. 

There are plenty of those reading the Mirror (all believing that everything from the economy to global warming and the failure of England at the World Cup is the fault of some Old Etonian) and the Guardian whose readers seem to have a conspiracy theory to fit every situation.

Still we could always have the Two Edded Monster Raving Loonies.
		
Click to expand...

Hahaha:rofl::rofl: ..... there is nothing funnier than a Daily Mail reader attempting to justify its trash...  oh leave off... my sides are sore.....   but its very worrying that the North of England could be left to suffer from a coalition of Tory-Kippers should Scotland go YES


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Jul 16, 2014)

2blue said:



			Hahaha:rofl::rofl: ..... there is nothing funnier than a Daily Mail reader attempting to justify its trash...  oh leave off... my sides are sore.....   but its very worrying that the North of England could be left to suffer from a coalition of Tory-Kippers should Scotland go YES
		
Click to expand...

It certainly never ceases to amaze me the assumptions people like to make.

I am not, nor ever have been a Daily Mail reader, I do, however, appear to have greater balance than some in that I can see, unlike you, that there are idiots on all sides of the political spectrum.

Why you feel the need to be patticularly worried for the North of England I don't know. Could you not be bothered to study the results of the recent Euro elections and the level of support for UKIP "up North".

So if the country is to fall into the hands of a coalition of Tory-Kippers it looks like the rest of us will have to hold the Northerners responsible.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 16, 2014)

This isn't fake or a joke

[video=youtube;F9qjomKLtBA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9qjomKLtBA[/video]


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 17, 2014)

Big UK government 'loan guarantee' investment going into the Grangemouth oil terminal.

I wonder what other investments will be announced within the next few weeks?


----------



## SocketRocket (Jul 17, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Big UK government 'loan guarantee' investment going into the Grangemouth oil terminal.

I wonder what other investments will be announced within the next few weeks?
		
Click to expand...

Thats good then.  Hopefully will protect jobs there.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 17, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Thats good then.  Hopefully will protect jobs there.
		
Click to expand...

It's the only thing that will but "Westminister" will still be  seen as the bad boys.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 17, 2014)

Good news imo, something Grangemouth needed.

It's just a guarantee on a loan, not an actual loan, or heaven forbid, investment.And Â£230 Million isn't exactly earth shattering either.

Personally, I'd have given that bawbag Ratcliffe back his Â£1 and nationalised Grangemouth, as mentioned a few pages back.


----------



## Val (Jul 17, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Big UK government 'loan guarantee' investment going into the Grangemouth oil terminal.

I wonder what other investments will be announced within the next few weeks?
		
Click to expand...

A loan guarantee and an investment are 2 very different things. The UK government won't be out of pocket so they are not investing in Grangemouth so reading it as a carrot for a NO vote IMO is wrong, anyone with an iota of intelligence can see through that.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 17, 2014)

And so on the EU Jean-Claude Juncker states...

_"Over the next five years, there won't be any new member states acceding to the European Union"_

Which of course BT leap on to highlight issue an iScotland will have joining the EU

Except they miss out the what he follows with..

_"It's hard to imagine that one of the candidate states with whom we are negotiating will have, in time, met all the accession criteria."_

And as he and his spokespeople have subsequently said this statement does not apply to an independent Scotland as clearly there are no ongoing negotiations.

But hey,  let's just muddy the water with spin just a little bit more.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 17, 2014)

Valentino said:



			A loan guarantee and an investment are 2 very different things. The UK government won't be out of pocket so they are not investing in Grangemouth so reading it as a carrot for a NO vote IMO is wrong, anyone with an iota of intelligence can see through that.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, forgot to put the inverted comma's on 'investment'.


----------



## Val (Jul 17, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Sorry, forgot to put the inverted comma's on 'investment'.
		
Click to expand...

It makes no odds how you did it, you said you "wonder what other investments will be announced within the next few weeks?". Can you elaborate as to what you really mean here rather than me assume that you mean Westminster are doing it as a ploy for NO votes when in reality it couldn't be further from the truth as they aren't fronting anything financially.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 17, 2014)

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/police-approve-anti-independence-orange-march-1-3479592

Oh dear.Carnage up the toon and I bet BT aren't best pleased with this going ahead.Neither am I btw.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Jul 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/police-approve-anti-independence-orange-march-1-3479592

Oh dear.Carnage up the toon and I bet BT aren't best pleased with this going ahead.Neither am I btw.
		
Click to expand...

Excellent - don't you just love the OO and their fascination with Dutch Royalty of times past.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jul 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/police-approve-anti-independence-orange-march-1-3479592

Oh dear.Carnage up the toon and I bet BT aren't best pleased with this going ahead.Neither am I btw.
		
Click to expand...

Yip, nightmare. Hopefully they won't muster outside my flat this time....


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 17, 2014)

In other words...........

150 sad old men in bowler hats being policed by 250 policemen.
Total waste of space, money and sense.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Jul 18, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In other words...........

150 sad old men in bowler hats being policed by 250 policemen.
Total waste of space, money and sense.
		
Click to expand...

Not quite, upto 15,000 expected.So lets say half that turn up.7,500 OO guys marching thru Edinburgh.Not a good sight for BT/YES/Scotland in general.Expect The James Connolly lot to mobilize which means CCS vs ICF and I reckon you could be looking at the biggest security operation Edinburgh has seen for a long,long time.Chuck in the Antifa lot too.

I know we live in a democracy, I know folk have the right to march, but the most sensible thing here is for Edinburgh Council to veto this.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 22, 2014)

I watched the John Beatie programme 'The Games People Play' tonight.
It was part of the Scotland 2014 series.
I would imagine it was only shown in Scotland but the techy guys could probably find it on IPlayer

It was a bit of an eye opener and very interesting.
All about linking sport to politics and the tricks politicians play. 

Good observation about Cameroon's big speech sending England off to Brazil.
This was followed a few days later showing the England team returning home to little media attention and certainly no Cameroon.
I somehow think he would have been there if they had won.


----------



## Old Skier (Jul 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I watched the John Beatie programme 'The Games People Play' tonight.
It was part of the Scotland 2014 series.
I would imagine it was only shown in Scotland but the techy guys could probably find it on IPlayer

It was a bit of an eye opener and very interesting.
All about linking sport to politics and the tricks politicians play. 

Good observation about Cameroon's big speech sending England off to Brazil.
This was followed a few days later showing the England team returning home to little media attention and certainly no Cameroon.
I somehow think he would have been there if they had won.
		
Click to expand...

Politics is politics. If this vote is all about politics nobody's going to bother to vote. This has got to be about a lot more than politics.  Like the person on the news the other day who said they would be voting yes as an iscot will make them proud to be a Scot. Why do you need to be independent to become proud was my immediate thought.


sent from my time machine waiting at a Scotish airport for the return of the Scotish football team from the World Cup.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Jul 23, 2014)

My thoughts today...

With the Glasgow 2014 Games starting today, is this potentially going to be a brilliant move for Independence to have the vote not long after? We all saw the nationalist pride that went around during London 2012, could Glasgow 2014 evoke the same emotions for the Scots, and results in many undecideds voting with their gut and voting Yes?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 23, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			My thoughts today...

With the Glasgow 2014 Games starting today, is this potentially going to be a brilliant move for Independence to have the vote not long after? We all saw the nationalist pride that went around during London 2012, could Glasgow 2014 evoke the same emotions for the Scots, and results in many undecideds voting with their gut and voting Yes?
		
Click to expand...

I really don't think that we are that shallow.

The one thing that has absolutely amazed me about the process is the respect for each other when it comes to the vote.
It is seldom talked about in public, even within families for fear of causing offense of starting a row.
I have attended a couple of village hall debates and they were ultra polite affairs.


----------



## CMAC (Jul 31, 2014)

This Tuesday 8pm ITV *live* Salmond V Darling live and unscripted...

Please tell me the useless numpty who chaired the Sturgeon fiasco won't be chairing...






am I the last person who's just noticed *Salmon*d and *Sturgeon* together:mmm:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Jul 31, 2014)

CMAC said:



			This Tuesday 8pm ITV *live* Salmond V Darling live and unscripted...

Please tell me the useless numpty who chaired the Sturgeon fiasco won't be chairing.../QUOTE]

God I hope not...........that was like watching two fighting fishwives being refereed by Betty Spencer. [Frank's wife]
		
Click to expand...


----------



## chrisd (Jul 31, 2014)

CMAC said:



			This Tuesday 8pm ITV *live* Salmond V Darling live and unscripted...

Please tell me the useless numpty who chaired the Sturgeon fiasco won't be chairing...





am I the last person who's just noticed *Salmon*d and *Sturgeon* together:mmm:
		
Click to expand...


Coo I really must remember to set the Sky +


----------



## CMAC (Jul 31, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:





CMAC said:



			This Tuesday 8pm ITV *live* Salmond V Darling live and unscripted...

Please tell me the useless numpty who chaired the Sturgeon fiasco won't be chairing.../QUOTE]

God I hope not...........that was like watching two fighting fishwives being refereed by Betty Spencer. [Frank's wife]
		
Click to expand...

Salmond, Sturgeon, fishwives.....I see what you did.


So ITV Tuesday night at 8pm is the plaice to be. _/sorry_

Click to expand...


----------



## CMAC (Aug 5, 2014)

Reminder about tonights debate- Media saying its like a first date and will be toned down with Salmond trying to win the female vote and Darling promising lots of new Powers for Scotland if they say no.

Will they end up with an awkward fumble at the end of the debate, or back to his place for 'coffee'


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 5, 2014)

Interesting to see how the msm are hyping up Salmond to destroy Darling, almost setting him up for a fall with anything less than Darling ending up weeping in the corner.I reckon it'll be a tie and I'll try and watch it the morra...I'm off to the orc dome to watch the mighty cabbage take on the forces of darkness.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Interesting to see how the msm are hyping up Salmond to destroy Darling, almost setting him up for a fall with anything less than Darling ending up weeping in the corner.I reckon it'll be a tie and I'll try and watch it the morra...*I'm off to the orc dome to watch the mighty cabbage take on the forces of darkness*.
		
Click to expand...

I didn't understand a word of that


----------



## Slab (Aug 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Interesting to see how the msm are hyping up Salmond to destroy Darling, almost setting him up for a fall with anything less than Darling ending up weeping in the corner.I reckon it'll be a tie and I'll try and watch it the morra..*.I'm off to the orc dome to watch the mighty cabbage take on the forces of darkness*.
		
Click to expand...

 And 20 forum points to the 1st non Scottish poster who understood this


Edit: that's CMAC out then


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 5, 2014)

How I wish we were still the forces of darkness...... forces of mild gloom now


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 5, 2014)

So Hibs are going to get a thumping - come on Rangers (at a guess)


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			So Hibs are going to get a thumping - come on Rangers (at a guess)
		
Click to expand...

mibbes aye, mibbes naw, but it comes as no surprise you want_ them _to win


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			mibbes aye, mibbes naw, but it comes as no surprise you want_ them _to win
		
Click to expand...

I don't really care who wins, I was just surprised to hear football was still played north of the boarder.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I don't really care who wins, I was just surprised to hear football was still played north of the boarder.
		
Click to expand...

I'm surprised you are surprised as the English teams continue to buy our best players and managers

Back to toe pick.

Say what you like about Salmond but he is an absolutely brilliant debater.
That is why Cameron won't go anywhere near him and has sacrificed Labour's Darling Boy on the high alter of politics. 

I think the combined party letter in today's press must now have sealed it for the naesayers.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I don't really care who wins, I was just surprised to hear football was still played north of the *boarder*.
		
Click to expand...

Freudian slip.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 5, 2014)

Moved to Scottish Football v English Football


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Freudian slip.
		
Click to expand...

Nope, bad spelling.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 5, 2014)

CMAC said:





Doon frae Troon said:



			Salmond, Sturgeon, fishwives.....I see what you did.


So ITV Tuesday night at 8pm is the plaice to be. _/sorry_

Click to expand...

It's on STV - not sure it's being broadcast more widely.  

I'm interested that Westminster have started to think it's OK to throw 'devo max' type promises (of the yeh right sort) into the mix and the way of Holyrood - absolutely in an attempt to influence the referendum and the debate - when Cameron claims the debate is nothing to do with him.  Well as he certainly would not be making these promises if there was not a pending referendum then the intent must be to influence - so Cameron - get off your Westminster backside and into a studio and DEBATE if you want to influence the referendum vote.  You can't have it both ways.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 5, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It's on STV - not sure it's being broadcast more widely.  

I'm interested that Westminster have started to think it's OK to throw 'devo max' type promises (of the yeh right sort) into the mix and the way of Holyrood - absolutely in an attempt to influence the referendum and the debate - when Cameron claims the debate is nothing to do with him.  Well as he certainly would not be making these promises if there was not a pending referendum then the intent must be to influence - so Cameron - get off your Westminster backside and into a studio and DEBATE if you want to influence the referendum vote.  You can't have it both ways.
		
Click to expand...

So.... you have spent months and 100s of posts complaining that the UK govt won't say what would happen in the event of a NO vote and now that they start to do just that you've got a new angle to gripe about!?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 5, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			So.... you have spent months and 100s of posts complaining that the UK govt won't say what would happen in the event of a NO vote and now that they start to do just that you've got a new angle to gripe about!?
		
Click to expand...

They haven't, though have they? They've told us about as much as the YES lot have...both are offering jam the morn


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			They haven't, though have they? They've told us about as much as the YES lot have...both are offering jam the morn
		
Click to expand...

Probably not, they are politicians. I've read a news report rather than the detail of whatever vagueness they have "promised".


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 5, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Probably not, they are politicians. I've read a news report rather than the detail of whatever vagueness they have "promised".
		
Click to expand...

They've promised to _investigate the options prior to the next GE_ so in other words, total bollocks.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 5, 2014)

Just hearing about Standard Life having some issues with the referendum - threatening to pull offices etc out of Scotland if a yes vote happens ?


----------



## CMAC (Aug 5, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Just hearing about Standard Life having some issues with the referendum - threatening to pull offices etc out of Scotland if a yes vote happens ?
		
Click to expand...

old news- do keep up.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 5, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:





CMAC said:



			It's on STV - not sure it's being broadcast more widely.
		
Click to expand...

Why would it be? 

We don't get a vote, remember, so there is nobody to be influenced. After all the programmes on TV are bad enough as it is.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 5, 2014)

CMAC said:



			old news- do keep up.
		
Click to expand...

Well its being broadcast by BBC news right now ?


----------



## CMAC (Aug 5, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Why would it be? 

We don't get a vote, remember, so there is nobody to be influenced. After all the programmes on TV are bad enough as it is.
		
Click to expand...

your screwing up quotes, I didnt say it's on STV blah blah, that was SILH- edit pls


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 5, 2014)

CMAC said:



			your screwing up quotes, I didnt say it's on STV blah blah, that was SILH- edit pls
		
Click to expand...

And that, my friend, was to whom I was replying.

Don't blame me for the quirks of the forum's operation. (Although, as a technophobe it was probably me who screwed it up).


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 5, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Well its being broadcast by BBC news right now ?
		
Click to expand...

That my friend is seriously funny.
Perhaps it was an innocent mistake.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That my friend is seriously funny.
Perhaps it was an innocent mistake.
		
Click to expand...


Sorry buts whats funny about them reporting about Standard Life and speaking to a representitve from Standard life ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 5, 2014)

Standard Life have mentioned this many times over the last 5 years.

Still it is on the BBC news [assuming it is not an innocent mistake] the same day as the big debate so I suppose to some it is 'news'.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Standard Life have mentioned this many times over the last 5 years.

Still it is on the BBC news [assuming it is not an innocent mistake] the same day as the big debate so I suppose to some it is 'news'.
		
Click to expand...

Yep still missing hwo that becomes very funny ?


----------



## Val (Aug 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			They've promised to _investigate the options prior to the next GE_ so in other words, total bollocks.
		
Click to expand...

I agree it appears to be lip service as devo max is and never was on the table. We shall see.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 5, 2014)

Well you guys outside Scotland were the winners tonight.

Salmond v Darling was a bit of a damp squib.

Who lied the most?
No Score draw I think.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			mibbes aye, mibbes naw, but it comes as no surprise you want_ them _to win
		
Click to expand...

Why would that be


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well you guys outside Scotland were the winners tonight.

Salmond v Darling was a bit of a damp squib.

Who lied the most?
No Score draw I think.
		
Click to expand...

One of the statements that Mr Salmond made which neither HID or I could get our head around was his statement "A Yes vote is a vote for ambition over fear".

Does this mean that currently those in the Yes campaign have no ambition and are quaking in their boots with fear.  Seemed a very strange statement.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2014)

CMAC said:



			your screwing up quotes, I didnt say it's on STV blah blah, that was SILH- edit pls
		
Click to expand...

Was it - damn - I read (when in Scotland) that it was only being broadcast by STV.  Sorry for misinformation,  And I missed it.


----------



## lex! (Aug 6, 2014)

It was bad news for Salmond, to be whipped in a TV debate by Darling, the greyest man ever. Still got no idea about what currency he should have, when we are only a few weeks away. Just a clueless rabble rouser.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

Fortunately I missed last night as it sounded like my man took a pasting, which isn't really a surprise given how much he had been built up by the press.But hold on a minute,the snap poll everyone is referring to tells us AD won by quite a bit...so why does that actual data tell us something else?

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-only-stat-that-matters/


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 6, 2014)

It always bothers me after these debates, whether it be for a general election or now for independence, that the aftermath turns into some kind of bizarre sports-style analysis of who "won". Why can't the commentators discuss the actual points and issues rather than the personalities....?

Nobody "won", these debates should be to inform the electorate and stimulate our own discussions. 

I didn't see it (watched the football instead - painful viewing of a different sort) but it appears that, as usual, it was detail-lite with the shouty men trying to be less shouty because that's how they'll win over female voters, apparently.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 6, 2014)

I thought we were doing mulligans on polls as we all agree they show nothing. The bits I saw they were both bad but your man was a little bit badder.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 6, 2014)

Didnae see it (fortunately) but seems like Salmond got tactics wrong. I believe best response would have been to simply state that currency pegged to UKÂ£, but maybe there's too much downside to that approach.

Newspapers coming out with 'victory' for whoever they backed pre 'debate' anyway!

It could well be a better tactic for National papers to take (or have taken) the attitude that a 'Yes' vote was a foregone conclusion! That way, the Yes become complacent and the Undecided react in 'classic Scottish style' and go against what 'the English' think! Or am I being a touch cynical - about both Scottish culture and Newspapers!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I
I didn't see it (watched the football instead - painful viewing of a different sort)
		
Click to expand...

The Petrofac training challenge trophy game on ALBA?I thought we played some decent football, maybe lacked a cutting edge but were the better team until the 12th man stepped into help out our hosts. Alot more confident about the season ahead now.

Another new last night, a star of david/red hand of ulster combo flag, I think we were all pretty impressed.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I thought we were doing mulligans on polls as we all agree they show nothing. The bits I saw they were both bad but your man was a little bit badder.
		
Click to expand...

We are, but when what the media reports is directly opposite to the actual facts contained within the poll they refer to, I'll flag it up.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			what the media reports is directly opposite to the actual facts
		
Click to expand...

Nothing new there then :smirk:


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The Petrofac training challenge trophy game on ALBA?I thought we played some decent football, maybe lacked a cutting edge but were the better team until the 12th man stepped into help out our hosts. Alot more confident about the season ahead now.

Another new last night, a star of david/red hand of ulster combo flag, I think we were all pretty impressed.
		
Click to expand...

It was painful viewing for a Rangers fan, shaded the first half but could only see one winner after Hibs equalised. I have a foot in both camps (ok, maybe a toe in one) with HID being a hibbee I thought Hibs looked much better than last year. Never should have been a red card (bad challenge but only worth a yellow) but given the decisions that also went against Rangers I think we can put it down to bad refereeing rather than any conspiracy..... you can agree to disagree with that if you like!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			We are, but when what the media reports is directly opposite to the actual facts contained within the poll they refer to, I'll flag it up.
		
Click to expand...

I think you just put a different spin on it, to be fair.

However, your spin was far more insightful! :thup:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It was painful viewing for a Rangers fan, shaded the first half but could only see one winner after Hibs equalised. I have a foot in both camps (ok, maybe a toe in one) with HID being a hibbee I thought Hibs looked much better than last year. Never should have been a red card (bad challenge but only worth a yellow) but given the decisions that also went against Rangers I think we can put it down to bad refereeing rather than any conspiracy..... you can agree to disagree with that if you like! 

Click to expand...

I thought we got lucky with penalty claim, reckon Forster hauled down Boyd, so aye, prob poor refereeing overall.Rangers this season are gonna be very predictable...Black in midfield bullying, Boyd holding the ball up and Miller running onto knock ons.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 6, 2014)

Alex 0 Darling 1



Liked a newspaper headline that "Alex takes a Pounding" 




Can't believe Salmond brought up Driving on the left if we vote yes and a serious threat from Aliens Darling countered these nonsense attacks very well and tried to bring it back to serious debate.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I thought we got lucky with penalty claim, reckon Forster hauled down Boyd, so aye, prob poor refereeing overall.Rangers this season are gonna be very predictable...Black in midfield bullying, Boyd holding the ball up and Miller running onto knock ons.
		
Click to expand...

I fear you might be right. There's a bit more to them than that with the likes of Wallace, Macleod and Templeton but they didn't seem to have much structure or composure to their play last night. They're not great, that's for sure. Early days, of course, but there seems much more to get excited about with a young Hibs team trying to play possession football.


----------



## IanG (Aug 6, 2014)

I sat through the whole 2hours. Neither man shed any new light on any of the important question nor cast significant new doubts over the others arguments. The whole tone was depressingly adversarial (politics as usual) which was disappointing to say the least. The STV format , of taking a breaks not only for the ads but to ask the talking heads in the studio what we should be thinking about what we just heard was irritating and patronising. 

Neither of them 'lost', neither looked very statesman-like,  both were petty and childish at times. 

What was lost was a chance to compare and contrast their two visions for our future - shame as that might have been interesting. 

Can you tell I wasn't impressed?


----------



## Val (Aug 6, 2014)

Salmond missed a trick last night IMO, he had a chance to put Darling under the cosh and he failed miserably IMO. When he had the chance to ask questions he laboured on too many leading questions like, do you agree Scotland could prosper as an independent country and then failed to let Darling answer properly, politicians dont answer yes or no so did he expect to get a yes or no. Darling went straight for the kill, "what is your plan B on currency?" His answer was as always, "we'll get plan A." Shocking, even the audience got annoyed at his failure to answer, he would get more kudos by admitting we don't have a plan B as we are sure through negotiation that a currency union will work and can prosper.

The YES campaign have criticised the NO camp for negativity, I saw no positivity from Salmond last night either and all he done was through negative spin on the YES campaign, oh the irony.

I don't think either came out well however Salmond wouldn't have won over any undecided voters on last nights performance


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I don't think either came out well however Salmond wouldn't have won over any undecided voters on last nights performance
		
Click to expand...


except it looks like he did

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-only-stat-that-matters/


----------



## Val (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			except it looks like he did

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-only-stat-that-matters/

Click to expand...

Interesting, very surprised at that.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Interesting, very surprised at that.
		
Click to expand...

me too, going on what I've read this morning.


----------



## Val (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			me too, going on what I've read this morning.
		
Click to expand...

I watched it with a very open mind last night and fully expected Salmond to wipe the floor with Darling but it was far from the case, he laboured so many meaningless points like driving on the right and being attacked by aliens. 

FFS man it's 6 weeks till the vote and you are behind on the polls, pull your finger out.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 6, 2014)

Valentino said:



			FFS man it's 6 weeks till the vote and you are behind on the polls, pull your finger out.
		
Click to expand...

Errm, no don't, thanks all the same!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 6, 2014)

So it's 6 weeks until the most important day of all - you have a chance to really jump on the countries national pride after Glasgow , you have the chance to really push on and show everyone the facts and prove everything isn't just empty promises 

And he failed - it was childish at times , nothing of any substance from Salmond to actually show how Scotland will be better off on their own ! It appears the biggest opponent to independence is Salmond himself - nothing to back up more empty promises - why on earth would the Scottish public vote for anything with him as the leader.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			why on earth would the Scottish public vote for anything with him as the leader.
		
Click to expand...

Because it's significantly bigger than one man, you silly sausage.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Because it's significantly bigger than one man, you silly sausage.
		
Click to expand...


I reckon you might need to tell him that :thup:

Again there was no factual evidence to back up his claims 

He should sell his white paper to Someone to print as a fantasy story


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I reckon you might need to tell him that :thup:

Again there was no factual evidence to back up his claims 

He should sell his white paper to Someone to print as a fantasy story
		
Click to expand...

factual evidence,eh?Blimey.

You're a laugh you are.I guess you're voting no then.


----------



## Val (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			factual evidence,eh?Blimey.

You're a laugh you are.I guess you're voting no then.
		
Click to expand...

He has no say, he lives in England


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			factual evidence,eh?Blimey.

You're a laugh you are.I guess you're voting no then.
		
Click to expand...

I don't have a vote.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I don't have a clue.
		
Click to expand...

I know.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I know.
		
Click to expand...


Rather childish - are you Salmond ? Or at least his influence has rubbed of on you - that's the sort retort he resorted too last night 

So Alex - what happens when you don't get plan A

Alex - we will get plan A ?! 

Laughable :rofl:


----------



## Val (Aug 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Rather childish - are you Salmond ? Or at least his influence has rubbed of on you - that's the sort retort he resorted too last night 

So Alex - what happens when you don't get plan A

Alex - we will get plan A ?! 

Laughable :rofl:
		
Click to expand...

The chances are post YES he will get plan A but its the arrogant manner which he is portraying this that is my problem and I guess many others.

If he had said from the start we would prefer a currency union but will explore other options should we be denied one then things may be so much different. Currency will be a deciding factor for many people, particularly those who cross border trade.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 6, 2014)

Valentino said:



			The chances are post YES he will get plan A but its the arrogant manner which he is portraying this that is my problem and I guess many others.

If he had said from the start we would prefer a currency union but will explore other options should we be denied one then things may be so much different. Currency will be a deciding factor for many people, particularly those who cross border trade.
		
Click to expand...

Yes - I have no doubt that if a yes vote did happen - Scotland would use the pound and the interest rates etc from the Bank Of England etc but it certainly is currently doing himself no favours with the arrogance because if the yes vote happens he won't have the ace cards when it comes to any negotiations


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Rather childish - are you Salmond ? Or at least his influence has rubbed of on you - that's the sort retort he resorted too last night 

So Alex - what happens when you don't get plan A

Alex - we will get plan A ?! 

Laughable :rofl:
		
Click to expand...

I thought it was childish too.

Contrary to what you may think, I probably dislike Alex Salmond more than anyone on this forum, but the independence movement might be a wee bit more complicated than you can maybe understand, not that you understanding anything to do with this referendum makes any difference.

But for the sake of it, and seeing as you've not been paying attention, I'd not use the Â£, either in or out of a currency union ( so that's plan A and plan B, incase you didn't manage to keep up)

I'd create a new currency ( you're welcome to provide a comedy condescending name here if you like) I'd create a new central bank of Scotland and I'd not join The EU.We're pretty good at creating things in Scotland.

I'd also maybe consider re-looking at the euro.

So there you go, 4 plans, all viable, some more attractive than others but all perfectly workable.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 6, 2014)

Valentino said:



			The chances are post YES he will get plan A but its the arrogant manner which he is portraying this that is my problem and I guess many others.

If he had said from the start we would prefer a currency union but will explore other options should we be denied one then things may be so much different. Currency will be a deciding factor for many people, particularly those who cross border trade.
		
Click to expand...

We already know what currency we'll be using anyway.... joining the euro is a condition of entry to the EU nowadays......


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2014)

Currency.  It is 100% certain that an indep Scotland will have a currency after a YES vote (I sometimes get the feeling that BT view is that Scotland would float along currency-less).  How do I know they will have a currency? In fact I *don't *know they will have a currency - but someone tell me that Scotland will somehow be be 'currency-less'

So even at it's most simple nobody can actually guarantee Scotland will have ANY currency but we all know for certain there will be one - there simply HAS to be one.   Now let's think about whether EWANI would prefer an indep Scotland to have a common currency as them or not - come the event.  Westminster are of course quite entitled to say 'no common currency'.  This is an easy line to peddle - but maybe it wouldn't be so easy to stick to come the event,


----------



## Val (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I thought it was childish too.

Contrary to what you may think, I probably dislike Alex Salmond more than anyone on this forum, but the independence movement might be a wee bit more complicated than you can maybe understand, not that you understanding anything to do with this referendum makes any difference.

But for the sake of it, and seeing as you've not been paying attention, I'd not use the Â£, either in or out of a currency union ( so that's plan A and plan B, incase you didn't manage to keep up)

I'd create a new currency ( you're welcome to provide a comedy condescending name here if you like) I'd create a new central bank of Scotland and I'd not join The EU.We're pretty good at creating things in Scotland.

I'd also maybe consider re-looking at the euro.

So there you go, 4 plans, all viable, some more attractive than others but all perfectly workable.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately you don't make the policy decisions so all bets off here.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			We already know what currency we'll be using anyway.... joining the euro is a condition of entry to the EU nowadays......
		
Click to expand...

Nope.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I thought it was childish too.

Contrary to what you may think, I probably dislike Alex Salmond more than anyone on this forum, but the independence movement might be a wee bit more complicated than you can maybe understand, not that you understanding anything to do with this referendum makes any difference.

But for the sake of it, and seeing as you've not been paying attention, I'd not use the Â£, either in or out of a currency union ( so that's plan A and plan B, incase you didn't manage to keep up)

I'd create a new currency ( you're welcome to provide a comedy condescending name here if you like) I'd create a new central bank of Scotland and I'd not join The EU.We're pretty good at creating things in Scotland.

I'd also maybe consider re-looking at the euro.

So there you go, 4 plans, all viable, some more attractive than others but all perfectly workable.
		
Click to expand...


Do you make the policy choices ?


----------



## Val (Aug 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Currency.  It is 100% certain that an indep Scotland will have a currency after a YES vote (I sometimes get the feeling that BT view is that Scotland would float along currency-less).  How do I know they will have a currency? In fact I *don't *know they will have a currency - but someone tell me that Scotland will somehow be be 'currency-less'

So even at it's most simple nobody can actually guarantee Scotland will have ANY currency but we all know for certain there will be one - there simply HAS to be one.   Now let's think about whether EWANI would prefer an indep Scotland to have a common currency as them or not - come the event.  Westminster are of course quite entitled to say 'no common currency'.  This is an easy line to peddle - but maybe it wouldn't be so easy to stick to come the event,
		
Click to expand...

Of course it will have a currency, however the main issue is Salmond says it will be the pound, the treasury say it won't, Salmond has no back up in the event the treasury do call his bluff.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Do you make the policy choices ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes.I'm Spartacus.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Nope.
		
Click to expand...

Isn't it? That's what I get for listening to Radio Scotland!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Yes.I'm Spartacus.
		
Click to expand...

Well a couple of letters are right :thup:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Isn't it? That's what I get for listening to Radio Scotland! 

Click to expand...

Indeed.Serves you right.

Actually, it is right, but there's a wee bit that they have missed out.

Before you're allowed to adopt the euro you must adopt ERM II, without it it's impossible to adopt the Euro.ERM II is entirely optional and you are not obliged to join it at any point during your membership.So, you have to make an undertaking to join the euro, but the wee bit before ( which is essential to adopting the euro) is an optional extra you don't have to join.

The EU, don't you just love them?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Well a couple of letters are right :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Well done.Shouldn't you be over on the football thread telling us about our leagues?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Of course it will have a currency, however the main issue is Salmond says it will be the pound, the treasury say it won't, Salmond has no back up in the event the treasury do call his bluff.
		
Click to expand...

plan b, c, and d are in the white paper, B] Sterling used as an international trading currency. C] Sterling as a Scottish pound pegged 1-1 with the UK pound and D] Scottish pound as a floating currency, all viable although plan A best.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 6, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Well done.Shouldn't you be over on the football thread telling us about our leagues?
		
Click to expand...

I reckon you should join in the debate on telly as it appears you know exactly who should and shouldn't talk or have an opinion about the Independence. 

That way you can inform everyone of your policies and then inform people who don't have a vote that they have nothing worth saying 

At the end of the day all you have is a bit of paper saying yes or no - you have zero say it what happens after a yes or no and an Independent Scottish government will do just what all other governments do - what is best for them. Unless you seriously believe Scottish politicians are different from every single other one.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 6, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I reckon you should join in the debate on telly as it appears you know exactly who should and shouldn't talk or have an opinion about the Independence. 

That way you can inform everyone of your policies and then inform people who don't have a vote that they have nothing worth saying 

At the end of the day all you have is a bit of paper saying yes or no - you have zero say it what happens after a yes or no and an Independent Scottish government will do just what all other governments do - what is best for them. Unless you seriously believe Scottish politicians are different from every single other one.
		
Click to expand...

I think you are right.I think it should be me vs you on the BBC for the next debate.I'll even buy you a cornetto and fanta.


----------



## Val (Aug 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			plan b, c, and d are in the white paper, B] Sterling used as an international trading currency. C] Sterling as a Scottish pound pegged 1-1 with the UK pound and D] Scottish pound as a floating currency, all viable although plan A best.
		
Click to expand...

If that is the case then why hasn't Salmond stated this, or is it maybe a case plans b, c and are a play on words and all mean the same as A

This is the first i was aware of this, what section on the white paper is this on?


----------



## Val (Aug 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			plan b, c, and d are in the white paper, B] Sterling used as an international trading currency. C] Sterling as a Scottish pound pegged 1-1 with the UK pound and D] Scottish pound as a floating currency, all viable although plan A best.
		
Click to expand...

Now I have found this section, it said as follows




			Currency and monetary policy
An independent Scotland will be able to decide our currency
and the arrangements for monetary policy
.
Four currency options were examined by the Fiscal Commission
â€“ the continued use of Sterling (pegged and flexible), the
creation of a Scottish currency and membership of the Euro.
They concluded that retaining Sterling as part of a formal
monetary union with rest of the UK will be the best option. The
Fiscal Commission proposed a practical and workable model,
including governance and institutional arrangements that would
create a successful and robust framework.
The Commissionâ€™s analysis shows that it will not only be
in Scotlandâ€™s interests to retain Sterling but that â€“ post
independence â€“ this will also benefit the rest of the UK.
Under such an arrangement, monetary policy will be set
according to economic conditions across the Sterling Area with
ownership and governance of the Bank of England undertaken
on a shareholder basis.
		
Click to expand...

That is not 4 options, that is one option.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 6, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Now I have found this section, it said as follows



That is not 4 options, that is one option.
		
Click to expand...

Even that White paper smacks full of arrogance 

There appears to be no provisions for what happens when they don't get what they want under a yes vote


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 6, 2014)

In truth, I think there is a fair chance if we go independent that we will indeed form a currency union with rUK. The big question is what will we have to give up during negotiations to achieve that....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2014)

Supporters of the union have been focussing, in particular, on Alex Salmondâ€™s apparent lack of a â€˜Plan Bâ€™ on currency. I couldnâ€™t care less if Scotland has pounds, dollars, euros or groats as long as they have a currency that works for them. Most of us buy goods from across the world and pay in our currency. Those from whom we purchase goods get paid in their local currency. It works. Large businesses are already trading in multiple currencies without difficulty. And there is no doubt, despite what Alistair Darling says, that the pound is Scotland's to use, if they want to. It is used by the Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands, all of which govern themselves.

Alistair Darling knows full well from the report of the Fiscal Commission that there is a Plan B on currency. And a Plan C, D and E. Rather than being seen as a weakness or a seeming inability to answer the question, it is correct for the First Minister to promote the plan that is best for Scotland - and incidentally the rUK - of a formal currency union.

The next best plan for Scotland, according to Annex 1 of the Fiscal Commission report, seems to be to use the pound without a currency union. This wouldnâ€™t be as beneficial to Scotland in its early days of independence but it would be even less beneficial to rUK and that is why I believe there will be a currency union.

What supporters of the union wonâ€™t tell you is that, without a currency union, it is very likely that sterling would devalue. This would have a very serious effect on the rUKâ€™s ability to meet its debts and public expenditure. Take oil, gas and whisky revenues out of the rUKâ€™s balance of payments - which would happen in the absence of a currency union - and Westminster would have serious problems. That really is the nub of the matter and why George Osborne and Ed Balls have been playing what they see as their trump card of scaring people in Scotland into believing they can no longer use the pound and there will be no currency union.


----------



## Val (Aug 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Supporters of the union have been focussing, in particular, on Alex Salmondâ€™s apparent lack of a â€˜Plan Bâ€™ on currency. I couldnâ€™t care less if Scotland has pounds, dollars, euros or groats as long as they have a currency that works for them. Most of us buy goods from across the world and pay in our currency. Those from whom we purchase goods get paid in their local currency. It works. Large businesses are already trading in multiple currencies without difficulty. And there is no doubt, despite what Alistair Darling says, that the pound is Scotland's to use, if they want to. It is used by the Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands, all of which govern themselves.

Alistair Darling knows full well from the report of the Fiscal Commission that there is a Plan B on currency. And a Plan C, D and E. Rather than being seen as a weakness or a seeming inability to answer the question, it is correct for the First Minister to promote the plan that is best for Scotland - and incidentally the rUK - of a formal currency union.

The next best plan for Scotland, according to Annex 1 of the Fiscal Commission report, seems to be to use the pound without a currency union. This wouldnâ€™t be as beneficial to Scotland in its early days of independence but it would be even less beneficial to rUK and that is why I believe there will be a currency union.

What supporters of the union wonâ€™t tell you is that, without a currency union, it is very likely that sterling would devalue. This would have a very serious effect on the rUKâ€™s ability to meet its debts and public expenditure. Take oil, gas and whisky revenues out of the rUKâ€™s balance of payments - which would happen in the absence of a currency union - and Westminster would have serious problems. That really is the nub of the matter and why George Osborne and Ed Balls have been playing what they see as their trump card of scaring people in Scotland into believing they can no longer use the pound and there will be no currency union.
		
Click to expand...

Is this your own thought, something you heard, a discussion in the golf club, a post on another website?

If it's your genuine thoughts its the best post you've made on this 3264 post thread.

However, you can dress it up all you like as it stands a currency union is not on the cards therefore Salmond needs to consider plan B and beyond in a bit more depth at least to add some substance to his thoughts.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Is this your own thought, something you heard, a discussion in the golf club, a post on another website?

If it's your genuine thoughts its the best post you've made on this 3264 post thread.

However, you can dress it up all you like as it stands a currency union is not on the cards therefore Salmond needs to consider plan B and beyond in a bit more depth at least to add some substance to his thoughts.
		
Click to expand...

Some own thought some other thought reflecting mine


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			What supporters of the union wonâ€™t tell you is that, without a currency union, it is very likely that sterling would devalue. This would have a very serious effect on the rUKâ€™s ability to meet its debts and public expenditure. Take oil, gas and whisky revenues out of the rUKâ€™s balance of payments - which would happen in the absence of a currency union - and Westminster would have serious problems. That really is the nub of the matter and why George Osborne and Ed Balls have been playing what they see as their trump card of scaring people in Scotland into believing they can no longer use the pound and there will be no currency union.
		
Click to expand...

True the tax revenues would disappear but so would the costs. In any event oil and gas revenues have long since peaked .

Also the UK economy seems to be growing steadily.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 6, 2014)

I was really surprised how low down Trident was on the Yes side of the debate by Salmond.
I think it was mentioned three times by selected audience members at the start of the Debate.

I believe a deal has been struck for giving Scotland the currency union if they keep Trident.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I was really surprised how low down Trident was on the Yes side of the debate by Salmond.
I think it was mentioned three times by selected audience members at the start of the Debate.

I believe a deal has been struck for giving Scotland the currency union if they keep Trident.
		
Click to expand...

Excellent - the horse trading has started behind the scenes - about time too.  What is Westminster's contingency plan for Trident if an indep Scotland kicks it out - can't recall hearing or reading about it.  There must be one.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Excellent - the horse trading has started behind the scenes - about time too.  What is Westminster's contingency plan for Trident if an indep Scotland kicks it out - can't recall hearing or reading about it.  There must be one.
		
Click to expand...


You are talking like what Doon has suggested is actually the truth 

At the moment when looking at the polls a yes vote isn't going to happen - so why do they need to do any "deals" 

I'm unaware that Westminster had to produce contingency plans


----------



## Val (Aug 6, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Excellent - the horse trading has started behind the scenes - about time too.  What is Westminster's contingency plan for Trident if an indep Scotland kicks it out - can't recall hearing or reading about it.  *There must be one.*

Click to expand...

No need, yet.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 6, 2014)

Valentino said:



			No need, yet.
		
Click to expand...

No need? Then why are businesses seemingly all preparing their contingency plans?  They do it because they do a risk assessment then decide if their is a risk what they can do to mitigate it - and what they would need to do if they could not mitigate it.  If business sees the need for contingency plans - and we hear of many of the 'we'll move from Scotland if YES'  nature - then why would Westminster and the MoD not be doing the same?  

Actually I would be very surprised if the MoD did not already have a contingency plan for moving Trident.  And one reason would be 'business continuity' in the context of 'disaster recovery'.  Ask the question how Trident would operate in the loss of the Coulport base...through fire let's say.  Where would the subs and warheads go? etc  Every government department has to have these plans in place.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No need? Then why are businesses seemingly all preparing their contingency plans?  They do it because they do a risk assessment then decide if their is a risk what they can do to mitigate it - and what they would need to do if they could not mitigate it.  If business sees the need for contingency plans - and we hear of many of the 'we'll move from Scotland if YES'  nature - then why would Westminster and the MoD not be doing the same?  

Actually I would be very surprised if the MoD did not already have a contingency plan for moving Trident.  And one reason would be 'business continuity' in the context of 'disaster recovery'.  Ask the question how Trident would operate in the loss of the Coulport base...through fire let's say.  Where would the subs and warheads go? etc  Every government department has to have these plans in place.
		
Click to expand...

Even in the case of a Yes vote I think you would be looking at a 20 year plan to move them.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 7, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Even in the case of a Yes vote I think you would be looking at a 20 year plan to move them.
		
Click to expand...

Certainly for a permanent move - but there has to be a short term disaster recovery plan.  Might well simply be that they are all sent out to sea.  More likely I'm guessing that the Trident sub that will be at Coulport/Faslane is berthed up somewhere else.  That might be Rosyth (secure enough?) but in independence scenario that wouldn't be possible so Portsmouth is obvious place.  Quite possible that they might also go to nearest US base but not sure that that would be politically acceptable (in the more global political sense)


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Certainly for a permanent move - but there has to be a short term disaster recovery plan.  Might well simply be that they are all sent out to sea.  More likely I'm guessing that the Trident sub that will be at Coulport/Faslane is berthed up somewhere else.  That might be Rosyth (secure enough?) but in independence scenario that wouldn't be possible so Portsmouth is obvious place.  Quite possible that they might also go to nearest US base but not sure that that would be politically acceptable (in the more global political sense)
		
Click to expand...

Or quite possibly they will stay exactly where they are :thup:

That is the only place for them to be stored in the UK


----------



## Val (Aug 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No need? Then why are businesses seemingly all preparing their contingency plans?  They do it because they do a risk assessment then decide if their is a risk what they can do to mitigate it - and what they would need to do if they could not mitigate it.  If business sees the need for contingency plans - and we hear of many of the 'we'll move from Scotland if YES'  nature - then why would Westminster and the MoD not be doing the same?  

Actually I would be very surprised if the MoD did not already have a contingency plan for moving Trident.  And one reason would be 'business continuity' in the context of 'disaster recovery'.  Ask the question how Trident would operate in the loss of the Coulport base...through fire let's say.  Where would the subs and warheads go? etc  Every government department has to have these plans in place.
		
Click to expand...

Businesses make plans because it affects their entire day to day running. As much as it seems not, Trident is only a small part of the UK forces so they don't need contigency just yet, as far as I was aware, 1 - Coulport is currently UK waters and will remain so until independence is fully confirmed and accepted world wide. 2 - It would be a long time before permanent removal, it's not like you are just evicting a tenent. 3 - Do you seriously suggest that the YES camp would just evict everything from Coulport and make many people redundant in the stroke of a pen? 



SocketRocket said:



			Even in the case of a Yes vote I think you would be looking at a 20 year plan to move them.
		
Click to expand...

:thup:



SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Certainly for a permanent move - but there has to be a short term disaster recovery plan.  Might well simply be that they are all sent out to sea.  More likely I'm guessing that the Trident sub that will be at Coulport/Faslane is berthed up somewhere else.  That might be Rosyth (secure enough?) but in independence scenario that wouldn't be possible so Portsmouth is obvious place.  Quite possible that they might also go to nearest US base but not sure that that would be politically acceptable (in the more global political sense)
		
Click to expand...

The short term disaster recovery would have been in place since subs were first stuck on the Clyde, that is not going to be a new thing.

So in theory you agree with my statement there is no need for contigency......yet.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 7, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Businesses make plans because it affects their entire day to day running. As much as it seems not, Trident is only a small part of the UK forces so they don't need contigency just yet, as far as I was aware, 1 - Coulport is currently UK waters and will remain so until independence is fully confirmed and accepted world wide. 2 - It would be a long time before permanent removal, it's not like you are just evicting a tenent. 3 - Do you seriously suggest that the YES camp would just evict everything from Coulport and make many people redundant in the stroke of a pen? 



:thup:



The short term disaster recovery would have been in place since subs were first stuck on the Clyde, that is not going to be a new thing.

So in theory you agree with my statement there is no need for contigency......yet.
		
Click to expand...

Not really - you are hostage to fortune if you don't have a contingency plan in place but rely on your risk mitigations.  You are OK if your risk mitigation is 100% and MoD may see there as being no risk of either Coulport or Faslane being put out of commission.  But loss of site is a standard risk and all businesses will (or should) have a contingency plan for that.  They almost certainly will have one if the site is 'business critical'.   Maybe the MoD view is that they'd decide what to do if and when they Coulport or Faslane were lost.  But I'm not sure a government department - certainly one as critical as the MoD - would be allowed to go about their business without contingency plans in place.  Certainly the likes of the DWP must have contingency plans for all risks.

But of course for obvious reasons the MoD is NEVER going to tell us of their contingency plan for loss of Faslane or Coulport - even if they have one.


----------



## Val (Aug 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not really - you are hostage to fortune if you don't have a contingency plan in place but rely on your risk mitigations.  You are OK if your risk mitigation is 100% and MoD may see there as being no risk of either Coulport or Faslane being put out of commission.  But loss of site is a standard risk and all businesses will (or should) have a contingency plan for that.  They almost certainly will have one if the site is 'business critical'.   Maybe the MoD view is that they'd decide what to do if and when they Coulport or Faslane were lost.  But I'm not sure a government department - certainly one as critical as the MoD - would be allowed to go about their business without contingency plans in place.  Certainly the likes of the DWP must have contingency plans for all risks.

But of course for obvious reasons the MoD is NEVER going to tell us of their contingency plan for loss of Faslane or Coulport - even if they have one. 

Click to expand...

Would it be a fair assumptions these plans would have been already in place at ALL mod stations regardless of whether we were having a referendum or not?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 7, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Would it be a fair assumptions these plans would have been already in place at ALL mod stations regardless of whether we were having a referendum or not?
		
Click to expand...

I would assume that *all *government departments and sites have disaster recovery contingency plans. Certainly all main DWP sites do, as must all sites of any company providing the DWP with a key service.

So a disaster recovery contingency plan for Trident sites will exist - though we can never be told about it.  Point is that there is somewhere not in Scotland that the Trident subs could go, and basic plans will be in place for such a move.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Maybe the MoD view is that they'd decide what to do if and when they Coulport or Faslane were lost.  But I'm not sure a government department - certainly one as critical as the MoD - would be allowed to go about their business without contingency plans in place.  Certainly the likes of the DWP must have contingency plans for all risks.

But of course for obvious reasons the MoD is NEVER going to tell us of their contingency plan for loss of Faslane or Coulport - even if they have one. 

Click to expand...

MoD is one of the Departments that adopts the (slightly arrogant) approach that they can simply requisition certain things without going through 'normal' procedure. They quite possibly have contingency plans for those Faslane and Coulport being out of commision for a period, but it wouldn't surprise me (and as you say, we'll never find out) if there were no plans to cover permanent loss. I'm sure there would have been some checking - and maybe planning - done in the last year though!

Business, on the other hand, is legally required to identify all major risks and develop plans to mitigate them - which is why the likes of Standard Life et al identified and documented them in their Annual Report. The news media simply leaped on these an (distortadly in several cases) reported their 'plans to move'! Headline grabbing of the worst kind imo!


----------



## CMAC (Aug 7, 2014)

I'm now told Salmond has a speech impediment, is that to get the sympathy vote I wonder? or sympa*f*y if Salmond said it.

I always assumed it was laziness or upbringing as he can say _then_ and _there_ and _the_ but not commonweal*f*

Mark Crossfield is pretty bad for that, nightmare when he says he used a free wood at a par free and was out in firty free.

is this an actual recognised speech impediment? didn't know that.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 7, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			MoD is one of the Departments that adopts the (slightly arrogant) approach that they can simply requisition certain things without going through 'normal' procedure. They quite possibly have contingency plans for those Faslane and Coulport being out of commision for a period, but it wouldn't surprise me (and as you say, we'll never find out) if there a plans to cover permanent loss.

Business, on the other hand, is legally required to identify all major risks and develop plans to mitigate them - which is why the likes of Standard Life et al identified and documented them in their Annual Report. The news media simply leaped on these an (distortadly in several cases) reported their 'plans to move'! Headline grabbing of the worst kind imo!
		
Click to expand...

Agree completely.  The fact that company X has identified the risk associated with YES and stated what they MIGHT do does not actually mean they'd do.  All risk management and assessment is about mights and maybes.  What you actually do in the event of a risk occurring is pretty much always contingent on the detailed circumstances pertaining around the risk event at the time of the event.  And those circumstances are uncertain at best - and often unknown.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 7, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I'm now told Salmond has a speech impediment, is that to get the sympathy vote I wonder? or sympa*f*y if Salmond said it.

I always assumed it was laziness or upbringing as he can say _then_ and _there_ and _the_ but not commonweal*f*

Mark Crossfield is pretty bad for that, nightmare when he says he used a free wood at a par free and was out in firty free.

is this an actual recognised speech impediment? didn't know that.
		
Click to expand...

He does the Glasgow thing by saying uz instead of us which annoys me.

He also managed to pronounce England very well in his debate when he should have been saying rUK.
That annoyed me even more.


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			He also managed to pronounce England very well in his debate when he should have been saying rUK.
		
Click to expand...


Doubt if that was a slip of the tongue either...

Still not convinced Mr Salmond actually desires independence... Just using this entire 'exercise' to see how much Westminster is willing to offer up for his preferred option...


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 7, 2014)

So SILH, have you joined "Yes London" yet?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27655496


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 7, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			So SILH, have you joined "Yes London" yet?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27655496

Click to expand...

I'm actually more 'undecided' than Yes.  

Anyway they certainly have a more valid voice than the 200 mostly non-Scottish non-voting celebs reported in headlines today as supporting BT - I wonder if any of them know anything at all about the issues - but they grab a headline.  And I wonder how many non-Scottish non-voting celebs actually support YES.  Not many - but then you wouldn't expect there to be very many would you.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 11, 2014)

Still reading a lot of stuff implying that a YES will have Alex Salmond as Scotland First Minister - good ploy if you think Alex Salmond is a disingenuous self-serving wide-boy.  Well he might be FM be for a short while but maybe not for that long if a Scottish Labour party got it's act together for the first Scottish General Election - besides if YES then job done for Wee Eck and he can hand the reins over to Daphne as leader of SNP.

Also note John Redwood making noises about Scotland losing Westminster representation following a NO due to the West Lothian question and putting up strong opposition to any further devolution of tax raising powers under a devo max scenario.  Maybe not the best time to start on about potential negatives for Scotland in Westminster around a NO.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...scottish-mps-voting-on-english-taxes.24996540


----------



## Val (Aug 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Still reading a lot of stuff implying that a YES will have Alex Salmond as Scotland First Minister - good ploy if you think Alex Salmond is a disingenuous self-serving wide-boy.  Well he might be FM be for a short while but maybe not for that long if a Scottish Labour party got it's act together for the first Scottish General Election - besides if YES then job done for Wee Eck and he can hand the reins over to Daphne as leader of SNP.

Also note John Redwood making noises about Scotland losing Westminster representation following a NO due to the West Lothian question and putting up strong opposition to any further devolution of tax raising powers under a devo max scenario.  Maybe not the best time to start on about potential negatives for Scotland in Westminster around a NO.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...scottish-mps-voting-on-english-taxes.24996540

Click to expand...

So can you tell me where in the article it says Scotland d could lose Westminster representation post No? I don't see anywhere it days that.

I do see it saying Scottish MP's shouldn't get a vote on taxes that don't affect Scotland though.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So can you tell me where in the article it says Scotland d could lose Westminster representation post No? I don't see anywhere it days that.

I do see it saying Scottish MP's shouldn't get a vote on taxes that don't affect Scotland though.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe I shouldn't go by what I hear on the radio (though I thought I read it also).  Though maybe what I heard was removing Scottish MPs voting rights on English only matters - thereby losing representation in votes on such matters.

As it happens I wasn't disagreeing with him just thinking that maybe he should keep quiet on this sort of stuff until after the NO vote.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Maybe I shouldn't go by what I hear on the radio (though I thought I read it also).  Though maybe what I heard was removing Scottish MPs voting rights on English only matters - thereby losing representation in votes on such matters.

As it happens I wasn't disagreeing with him just thinking that maybe he should keep quiet on this sort of stuff until after the NO vote.
		
Click to expand...

It seems quite reasonable to me that Scottish MP's should not vote on English only matters. If they disagree with this then it would be very hypocritical.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'm actually more 'undecided' than Yes.  

Anyway they certainly have a more valid voice than the 200 mostly non-Scottish non-voting celebs reported in headlines today as supporting BT - I wonder if any of them know anything at all about the issues - but they grab a headline.  And I wonder how many non-Scottish non-voting celebs actually support YES.  Not many - but then you wouldn't expect there to be very many would you.
		
Click to expand...

How is their voice any more valid when the issue in question refers to the union that is the UK. Place of birth is totally irrelevant and you of all those of we UK citizens who are disenfranchised should realise this.


----------



## delc (Aug 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So can you tell me where in the article it says Scotland d could lose Westminster representation post No? I don't see anywhere it days that.

I do see it saying Scottish MP's shouldn't get a vote on taxes that don't affect Scotland though.
		
Click to expand...

Surely if Scotland votes for independence, why should they have any representation in the Westminster Government, any more than having English and Welsh representatives in the Edinburgh Government?  They would become a separate sovereign state with its own parliament.  :mmm:


----------



## Val (Aug 11, 2014)

delc said:



			Surely if Scotland votes for independence, why should they have any representation in the Westminster Government, any more than having English and Welsh representatives in the Edinburgh Government?  They would become a separate sovereign state with its own parliament.  :mmm:
		
Click to expand...

I assume you don't understand what post NO means


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I assume you don't understand what post NO means
		
Click to expand...

Have a like


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I assume you don't understand what post NO means
		
Click to expand...

That was quick, liked the first post.


----------



## Val (Aug 11, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			That was quick, liked the first post.
		
Click to expand...

Changed my mind, I didn't want banned but glad someone spotted it and understood


----------



## delc (Aug 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I assume you don't understand what post NO means
		
Click to expand...

Surely if the Scots vote NO, then things will more or less continue as they are now? I've never been sure why Scotland should have its own regional government as part of the UK, whereas England doesn't!  I would much prefer it if Scotland stays part of the UK. We are stronger together I believe.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 11, 2014)

delc said:



			Surely if the Scots vote NO, then things will more or less continue as they are now? I've never been sure why Scotland should have its own regional government as part of the UK, whereas England doesn't!  I would much prefer it if Scotland stays part of the UK. We are stronger together I believe. 

Click to expand...

Well they might.  But if a NO is encouraged by promises of moves towards devo max then there may well be some form of adjustment to such as block grant funding and Westminster voting rights for Scottish MPs.  Also with the risk of independence quashed by a NO vote there would be opportunity to address the West Lothian question and as the Scottish Secretary has indicated put 'measures' in place that tie Scotland closer to Westminster in some way to remove the possibility of future demand for a further referendum vote.


----------



## Andy808 (Aug 11, 2014)

Haven't they gone yet?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 11, 2014)

Andy808 said:



			Haven't they gone yet?
		
Click to expand...

If they can't take it with them then they're not going.


----------



## Val (Aug 12, 2014)

Andy808 said:



			Haven't they gone yet?
		
Click to expand...

Where are "they" going?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

http://wingsoverscotland.com/WeeBlueBookMobileEdition.pdf


----------



## CMAC (Aug 12, 2014)

whens round 2 of 'Alex takes a _Pound_ing'?


----------



## JCW (Aug 12, 2014)

I yes vote is coming then what , we need a visa to enter scotland


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 12, 2014)

JCW said:



			I yes vote is coming then what , we need a visa to enter scotland
		
Click to expand...

Golf tourists just need a HDID certificate. The others can join the big queue.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Golf tourists just need a HDID certificate. The others can join the big queue.
		
Click to expand...

Hahahaha

I enjoyed that.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

JCW said:



			I yes vote is coming then what , we need a visa to enter scotland
		
Click to expand...

There will be a multiple choice quiz at hadrians wall, if you answer 75% of questions correctly, you will be allowed to enter, if below this threshold, you'll be sent to Sunderland for the weekend instead.

Given you asked this question...might be a statement given the lack of ?... you're either the home secretary announcing a new policy on the gm forum (unlikely) or you should head directly to Sunderland.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There will be a multiple choice quiz at hadrians wall, if you answer 75% of questions correctly, you will be allowed to enter, if below this threshold, you'll be sent to Sunderland for the weekend instead.

Given you asked this question...might be a statement given the lack of ?... you're either the home secretary announcing a new policy on the gm forum (unlikely) or you should head directly to Sunderland.
		
Click to expand...


Question 64 is.........Did you, or have you, ever refused to acknowledge a Scottish bank note?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 12, 2014)

I had the misfortune to hear some of the Radio Scotland phone in this morning, debating the subject of why a greater proportion of women are voting "No" compared with men. (27% vs 39% for "yes", according to the polls)

Rarely have I heard so much sexist nonsense, and that comes from someone who spends way too much time reading this forum.

Everything from "Women don't understand the issues" and "Women are scared" through to "women are more intelligent" on the other side. All that interspersed with callers who neither know or care about this particular issue and just wanted to argue for/against independence, using the same tired old reasons.....

Thankfully we are almost at the vote. Hopefully we'll be able to move on afterwards but I fear the worst!


----------



## CMAC (Aug 12, 2014)

CMAC said:



			whens round 2 of 'Alex takes a _Pound_ing'?
		
Click to expand...

must be soon, anyone?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 12, 2014)

CMAC said:



			must be soon, anyone?
		
Click to expand...

According to all and sundry he lost badly, strange how the following polls increased the Yes vote.
Funny folk the Scots!


----------



## One Planer (Aug 12, 2014)

Having watched a link to the previous debate, I have a question for the Scottish folk on here.

Darling asks Salmond "What would happen if you there is no currency union? What is your other option?"

Salmonds' reply was "Well get the first option (Currency Union)"

If a "Yes" vote is cast, and there is no currency union, then what?

Are you effectively a nation with out currency?

To my knowledge, Salmond has never offered an alternative or "Plan B" should a currency union not happen. 

I'm curious as to your thoughts as, well, it's going affect you guys the most.


----------



## Val (Aug 12, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Having watched a link to the previous debate, I have a question for the Scottish folk on here.

Darling asks Salmond "What would happen if you there is no currency union? What is your other option?"

Salmonds' reply was "Well get the first option (Currency Union)"

If a "Yes" vote is cast, and there is no currency union, then what?

Are you effectively a nation with out currency?

To my knowledge, Salmond has never offered an alternative or "Plan B" should a currency union not happen. 

I'm curious as to your thoughts as, well, it's going affect you guys the most.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think there will be anything other than a currency union however the arrogance of Salmond is what is creating the ongoing debate on this


----------



## williamalex1 (Aug 12, 2014)

I think the Ed Miliband statement saying Labour would be against a  currency union will get peoples backs up , and could sway some to vote yes. imho.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 12, 2014)

There is bound to be a currency union if there is a yes vote.
rUK economy could not take a 10/12% devaluation plus the loss of oil/whisky/food etc tax revenue.

Most of Scotland are not impressed/intimidated with the naesayers attempted 'poker face'.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Having watched a link to the previous debate, I have a question for the Scottish folk on here.

Darling asks Salmond "What would happen if you there is no currency union? What is your other option?"

Salmonds' reply was "Well get the first option (Currency Union)"

If a "Yes" vote is cast, and there is no currency union, then what?

Are you effectively a nation with out currency?

To my knowledge, Salmond has never offered an alternative or "Plan B" should a currency union not happen. 

I'm curious as to your thoughts as, well, it's going affect you guys the most.
		
Click to expand...

There is a plan b/c/d, it's in the white paper, its there for all to see.

b= use the Â£, no currency union
c= new scottish currency, set up a new central bank
d= use the euro

b= no currency union, rUK continues with the same level of debt but the balance of payments is higher due to no oil/gas/whiskey/renewables/manufacturing from Scotland being taken into consideration.The value of the Â£ is reduced as 9% of its users are no longer there.Issue for Scotland is we have no lender of last resort, no technical currency, *which is the problem for rejoining EU*Not the wind and pish we're being fed, and the sole reason Salmond won't/can't say it on TV

c= all of the above re: rUK problems and the financial issues for Scotland in setting up new currency

d= not ideal right now, I'd maybe be open to this in 5/10 years.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			whiskey
		
Click to expand...

And you call yourself a Scot! 

Scotland gets Whisky revenue, the revenue from Whiskey is left to Ireland/America!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			And you call yourself a Scot! 

Scotland gets Whisky revenue, the revenue from Whiskey is left to Ireland/America! 

Click to expand...

I get that wrong all the time!I can never recall which is which.And given it's generally brutal stuff, I'm OK with that.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I get that wrong all the time!I can never recall which is which.And given it's generally brutal stuff, I'm OK with that.
		
Click to expand...

I'll be honest, I thought you were wrong, but I did have to google to check! If you guys do get independence, can you try and make sure you don't massively inflate the prices down here! The stuff we make ourselves isn't quite as good (not far off in some cases though!)


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I'll be honest, I thought you were wrong, but I did have to google to check! If you guys do get independence, can you try and make sure you don't massively inflate the prices down here! The stuff we make ourselves isn't quite as good (not far off in some cases though!)
		
Click to expand...

I was at a wedding at the weekend, my mate married a kiwi lassie...they drank New Zealand whiskey from a quaich and passed it round..it was mingin.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 12, 2014)

CMAC said:



			must be soon, anyone?
		
Click to expand...

no-one then


----------



## williamalex1 (Aug 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			There is bound to be a currency union if there is a yes vote.
rUK economy could not take a 10/12% devaluation plus the loss of oil/whisky/food etc tax revenue.

Most of Scotland are not impressed/intimidated with the naesayers attempted 'poker face'.
		
Click to expand...

I agree, we don't like threats.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

CMAC said:



			no-one then
		
Click to expand...

25/08


----------



## JCW (Aug 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Golf tourists just need a HDID certificate. The others can join the big queue.
		
Click to expand...


I be ok then as mine will be Cat 1 to go with my scottish birth rights


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

So to clarify, IF Scotland votes YES and HM Treasury in London rules out a currency union, Scotland could still use the Â£.

All the UK debt will continue to be the UK debt, the treasury have already said so.Scotland wouldn't be walking away from any debt, we'd be removed, by the treasury, from the obligation of contributing to the debt.

Not ideal.

No currency union and removing 5 million users of Â£ would have some kind of knock-on effect to the value of that currency, so would the value of the Â£ on international money markets begin to slide?Would the Euro/$/Yen/Rouble become more attractive to the markets?Would The City be seen as attractively as it is now?

No currency union removes all markets in Scotland from the balance of payments, HM Treasury couldn't use oil sales to offset the purchases from international market places, no alcohol duty, no fish or prawns.That's some serious numbers they're prepared to remove from their balance sheet.

And why would we be flexible with Coulport if Westminster shows no flexibilty with the Â£?

But that's not what Salmond is wanting.He's wanting to carry a proportion of debt.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 12, 2014)

CMAC said:



			no-one then
		
Click to expand...

Aug 25th BBC.


We had a family get together on Saturday and after our meal there was an interesting debate.
Voices were occasionally raised but we remained polite at all times.

Main issues of disagreement were
Health
Finance
Negativity/ Lies of the naesayers.

Areas of Agreement were

We can afford to be independant if we want to.
England is turning to the right and will continue to do so. We don't want Tory/UKIP leadership.

Results were
SIL Undecided
Daughter 1 Yes
Daughter 2 Nae
Wife Yes
Oldest Grandchild [12] Nae
Me  still Undecided.

So by my family debate and poll it will be a draw.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			We can afford to be independant if we want to.
England is turning to the right and will continue to do so. We don't want Tory/UKIP leadership.


Me  still Undecided.
		
Click to expand...

If the first two lines are correct, and not many would disagree, I can't understand why the last sentence should be so?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			No currency union and* removing 5 million users of Â£* would have some kind of knock-on effect to the value of that currency, so would the value of the Â£ on international money markets begin to slide?Would the Euro/$/Yen/Rouble become more attractive to the markets?Would The City be seen as attractively as it is now?
		
Click to expand...

Sorry for being slow but you'll need to run that by me again. If we're still using the pound, albeit without a formal union, in what sense are 5 million users removed? Is that in some sort of macro-economic sense?

I guess what I would like to know is the impact on the individual. So, for example, my assumption with a currency union is that my savings will be worth the same amount..... but how are they impacted without a union?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Negativity/ Lies of the naesayers.
		
Click to expand...

On both sides, actually.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Sorry for being slow but you'll need to run that by me again. If we're still using the pound, albeit without a formal union, in what sense are 5 million users removed? Is that in some sort of macro-economic sense?

I guess what I would like to know is the impact on the individual. So, for example, my assumption with a currency union is that my savings will be worth the same amount..... but how are they impacted without a union?
		
Click to expand...

Apologies, I was meaning with Scotland not using the Â£

As for your question on savings, do you mean with scotland still using the Â£ or not?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Apologies, I was meaning with Scotland not using the Â£

As for your question on savings, do you mean with scotland still using the Â£ or not?
		
Click to expand...

I'd guess if we don't use the Â£ there will be some sort of exchange rate issue and (as ever) associated charges. 

In a informal union I suppose my Â£ is still worth the same but impacted by any difference in inflation in Scotland vs over the border.... and any subsequent monetary policy decisions taken in London.


----------



## Val (Aug 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			There is a plan b/c/d, it's in the white paper, its there for all to see.

b= use the Â£, no currency union
c= new scottish currency, set up a new central bank
d= use the euro

b= no currency union, rUK continues with the same level of debt but the balance of payments is higher due to no oil/gas/whiskey/renewables/manufacturing from Scotland being taken into consideration.The value of the Â£ is reduced as 9% of its users are no longer there.Issue for Scotland is we have no lender of last resort, no technical currency, *which is the problem for rejoining EU*Not the wind and pish we're being fed, and the sole reason Salmond won't/can't say it on TV

c= all of the above re: rUK problems and the financial issues for Scotland in setting up new currency

d= not ideal right now, I'd maybe be open to this in 5/10 years.
		
Click to expand...

It's not offered in the white paper. The white paper said they look at all options but it said it's preferred option is a union, it doesn't elaborate on the other options.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It's not offered in the white paper. The white paper said they look at all options but it said it's preferred option is a union, it doesn't elaborate on the other options.
		
Click to expand...

I have to concede I'm thrown a wee bit by that.I know I've read the options I mentioned above somewhere, and I know it's from The Fiscal Commission, but I've just had a look and can't find it anywhere.

I've checked here> http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0042/00423466.pdf
 and here http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0041/00414291.pdf but no direct reference to the options I offer are made directly, which has me very confused.Very confused indeed.

But they are the options open to Scotland.Personally, I'd be keen on a new Scottish Currency.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://wingsoverscotland.com/WeeBlueBookMobileEdition.pdf

Click to expand...

I stopped when it got to here

"and the only reason terrorists might attack us is because weâ€™re part of the UK."

So it seems that terrorists only attack countries that make up the UK. If people actually believe this they must be off their little swede.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'd be keen on a new Scottish Currency.
		
Click to expand...

So does this mean you do not wish an iscot to join the EU.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			So does this mean you do not wish an iscot to join the EU.
		
Click to expand...

Correct.Or NATO.

EFTA/UN/Commonwealth/UEFA for me.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Correct.Or NATO.

EFTA/UN/Commonwealth/UEFA for me.
		
Click to expand...

Not FIFA, I notice - good choice!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It's not offered in the white paper. The white paper said they look at all options but it said it's preferred option is a union, it doesn't elaborate on the other options.
		
Click to expand...


This is driving me a wee bit demented this aftie, I'm convinced I've heard the jambo make reference to plan b/c/d, and this is the table I've seen him use as reference-

http://yes2014.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/planb.jpg

Taken that link from here> http://yes2014.net/2014/08/07/currency-crash-course-plan-a-b-c-d-they-do-exist/


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Not FIFA, I notice - good choice! 

Click to expand...

Waste of cash, we never qualify for their tournament anyway!


----------



## Val (Aug 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is driving me a wee bit demented this aftie, I'm convinced I've heard the jambo make reference to plan b/c/d, and this is the table I've seen him use as reference-

http://yes2014.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/planb.jpg

Taken that link from here> http://yes2014.net/2014/08/07/currency-crash-course-plan-a-b-c-d-they-do-exist/

Click to expand...

So it's not in the white paper after all 

I know you are all sure he said it somewhere so if that is the case why is he still being so arrogant about using the pound? And I agree if there is a yes there wl be a deal in ace for a union BUT that's not on the cards right now.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 12, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So it's not in the white paper after all 

I know you are all sure he said it somewhere so if that is the case why is he still being so arrogant about using the pound? And I agree if there is a yes there wl be a deal in ace for a union BUT that's not on the cards right now.
		
Click to expand...

Nothing is on the cards just now.I say nukes will need to be removed,someone on here comes along and tells me no, they'll stay exactly where they are.Barosso says its impossible for Scotland to join the EU,can anyone show me the how thats correct?

He can't say anything else now as he'd look weak for backing down...he's not played it particularily well, but he's not played a few things that well imo.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Aug 25th BBC.


We had a family get together on Saturday and after our meal there was an interesting debate.
Voices were occasionally raised but we remained polite at all times.

Main issues of disagreement were
Health
Finance
*Negativity/ Lies of the naesayers.*

Areas of Agreement were

*We can afford to be independant if we want to.*
England is turning to the right and will continue to do so. We don't want Tory/UKIP leadership.

Results were
SIL Undecided
Daughter 1 Yes
Daughter 2 Nae
Wife Yes
Oldest Grandchild [12] Nae
Me  still Undecided.

So by my family debate and poll it will be a draw.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for the date.

Lies of the NO campaign- please.

I believe the population of Scotland is representative of the population of Yorkshire. Can you see Yorkshire being capable of self sustained independence with the wealth they have within.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 12, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I believe the population of Scotland is representative of the population of Yorkshire. Can you see Yorkshire being capable of self sustained independence with the wealth they have within.
		
Click to expand...

Of course I can.
Exports of Wendleydale cheese alone would keep them solvent.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 12, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Lies of the NO campaign- please.
		
Click to expand...

If yes says it's so then it's so. Will you never learn. Thankfully they won't be able to say its so for much longer.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 12, 2014)

So we are going to drive on the right then, 'jokingly' said by Andy Burnham.


----------



## Val (Aug 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So we are going to drive on the right then, 'jokingly' said by Andy Burnham.
		
Click to expand...

Aye he said that off the cuff months ago but for some reason the YES campaign are holding on to this like it's a negative. Get real.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 13, 2014)

I recently heard that Boris wanted to know if Claire Ridge was a good looking girl.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 13, 2014)

If anyone with an interest in all this missed Andrew Neils programme on BBC2 last night, it should be available on the iPlayer, was pretty good viewing.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 13, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If anyone with an interest in all this missed Andrew Neils programme on BBC2 last night, it should be available on the iPlayer, was pretty good viewing.
		
Click to expand...

I watched the "debate" from Inverness beforehand, which was hugely depressing for a variety of reasons, but kept watching Andrew Neil's programme. Very interesting indeed, lots of consequences for rUK in the event of a yes vote.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 13, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If anyone with an interest in all this missed Andrew Neils programme on BBC2 last night, it should be available on the iPlayer, was pretty good viewing.
		
Click to expand...

I generally cannot stand Andrew Neil but that was a superb programme.
Farage was shown up for the sham that he is. Changing the name of UKIP to Little England
I would say that if you live in England make sure you watch it on iplayer....it open your eyes and mind.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 13, 2014)

Neat announcement by Michael Fallon - 3 new warships to be build on the Clyde securing 800 jobs.  Adding that UK warships are only built in the UK.  No comment from MoD about decision in event of a YES.  

Noting that I am not clear why our new warships can *only *be built in the UK when it is OK to buy our new warplanes for the carriers (the F-35) from the US - at a cost of Â£2.5 billion (at a neat Â£70m each) for initial order increasing to Â£6.2 billion.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Neat announcement by Michael Fallon - 3 new warships to be build on the Clyde securing 800 jobs.  Adding that UK warships are only built in the UK.  No comment from MoD about decision in event of a YES.  

Noting that I am not clear why our new warships can *only *be built in the UK when it is OK to buy our new warplanes for the carriers (the F-35) from the US - at a cost of Â£2.5 billion (at a neat Â£70m each) for initial order increasing to Â£6.2 billion.
		
Click to expand...


You do realise that the F35 or JSF is a joint venture with the US , NATO and other countries so we won't be buying an aircraft from the US as such.


----------



## Imurg (Aug 13, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			, lots of consequences for rUK in the event of a yes vote.
		
Click to expand...

Which annoys/saddens/worries me a tad.
I have no beef with the Scots, if they want to go it alone then that's their choice.
But if there are to be consequences that will affect my standard of living, my Country, my ability to put food on the table etc and I have no say in the matter, I find that a bit harsh on me.
I haven't watched the prog yet so don't know what these consequences are yet....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You do realise that the F35 or JSF is a joint venture with the US , NATO and other countries so we won't be buying an aircraft from the US as such.
		
Click to expand...

OK - but UK is not really building them - BAE Systems design and supply some components but it is a primarily a US aircraft.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 13, 2014)

Imurg said:



			Which annoys/saddens/worries me a tad.
I have no beef with the Scots, if they want to go it alone then that's their choice.
But if there are to be consequences that will affect my standard of living, my Country, my ability to put food on the table etc and I have no say in the matter, I find that a bit harsh on me.
I haven't watched the prog yet so don't know what these consequences are yet....
		
Click to expand...

Quite a piece at the start of it with UK politicians in denial about Trident and not actually believing that a Scottish Government would actually rid Scotland of Trident - and Jack Straw for one adamant that UK would still have Trident after a YES - somehow.   A bit like the currency debate but the other way around.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			OK - but UK is not really building them - BAE Systems design and supply some components but it is a primarily a US aircraft.
		
Click to expand...


It's an aircraft funded by a joint partnership from NATO countries and built by the people who put in the best bids - regardless of where the company is based it is still a joint partnership.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 13, 2014)

So iof it is built by the people with the best bids why would it be that BAE Systems would not be able to build the 3 warships in an independant Scotland if that is what they wished to do.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So iof it is built by the people with the best bids why would it be that BAE Systems would not be able to build the 3 warships in an independant Scotland if that is what they wished to do.
		
Click to expand...

I'm guessing because it's a UK ship that is being built for the UK so they would like it to stay within the UK 

The relevance to the JSF is zero.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 13, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			OK - but UK is not really building them - BAE Systems design and supply some components but it is a primarily a US aircraft.
		
Click to expand...

Which bit of joint doesn't fit this statement.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 13, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I have to concede I'm thrown a wee bit by that.I know I've read the options I mentioned above somewhere, and I know it's from The Fiscal Commission, but I've just had a look and can't find it anywhere.

I've checked here> http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0042/00423466.pdf
 and here http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0041/00414291.pdf but no direct reference to the options I offer are made directly, which has me very confused.Very confused indeed.

But they are the options open to Scotland.Personally, I'd be keen on a new Scottish Currency.
		
Click to expand...

Bingo.I knew I had heard him talk about this.This is more recent than I was referring to, but the thrust is exactly the same.

[video=youtube;VFtfs_CFx28]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFtfs_CFx28&sns=fb[/video]


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 13, 2014)

Another one http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28780811


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 13, 2014)

Fair play to the jambo here, he manages to keep his cool in the face of serious stupidity
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-28781276?SThisFB


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 13, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Fair play to the jambo here, he manages to keep his cool in the face of serious stupidity
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-28781276?SThisFB

Click to expand...

I see the SNP are now starting their own project fear targeting the NHS. I also always wonder why he always refers to England and not the RUK. He obviously thinks UK is made up of just England and Scotland with the rest of us an unimportant side show. 

He always gives the impression that if you don't agree with him then you are wrong and he is right IMHO.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I see the SNP are now starting their own project fear targeting the NHS. I also always wonder why he always refers to England and not the RUK. He obviously thinks UK is made up of just England and Scotland with the rest of us an unimportant side show. 

He always gives the impression that if you don't agree with him then you are wrong and he is right IMHO.
		
Click to expand...

He does , I agree.

NHS Scotland is fully devolved, completely separate to the NHS in England ( I do what he does too, it's nothing personal)

Funding isn't devolved,though.We get a direct % of what is spent on the NHS down south, so as that gets cut, so does ours.Why not have full control over what you spend your taxes on?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 14, 2014)

Another currency question..... maybe a daft one!

It's clear that we can use the Â£ without a formal currency union if we so choose. And downsides of that approach have been fairly well discussed.

What I haven't heard, however, is whether scottish banknotes would still be viable in that system. Would BofE still sanction their use? Would we still use them up here never mind whether they'd be accepted down south?


----------



## CMAC (Aug 14, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Another currency question..... maybe a daft one!

It's clear that we can use the Â£ without a formal currency union if we so choose. And downsides of that approach have been fairly well discussed.

What I haven't heard, however, is *whether scottish banknotes would still be viable in that system.* Would BofE still sanction their use? Would we still use them up here never mind whether they'd be accepted down south?
		
Click to expand...

As they have clearly stated they will not support or condone Scotland using the pound then down south would be a complete no-no. It's actually still a big hassle using them right now and we're a Union.

As to using them up here thats up to the Govt of the day- however Salmond will avoid this like he avoids all the other absolutely critical questions.


On another note- it's a pretty good certainty that if there is a 'Yes' vote there will be a run at the banks in Scotland with investors moving their cash to a more solid banking base down south (or elsewhere)


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 14, 2014)

CMAC said:



			On another note- it's a pretty good certainty that if there is a 'Yes' vote there will be a run at the banks in Scotland with investors moving their cash to a more solid banking base down south (or elsewhere)
		
Click to expand...

I think that it is also a certainty that there will also be a big run on sterling so perhaps those Scottish investors will convert to Euros or Dollars for a better deal


----------



## Val (Aug 14, 2014)

I've travelled extensively in England and have rarely encountered issues using Scottish notes, they don't like them but still take them almost everywhere, even London cab drivers


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 14, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I've travelled extensively in England and have rarely encountered issues using Scottish notes, they don't like them but still take them almost everywhere, even London cab drivers
		
Click to expand...

Agreed, you often hear the same tired old joke about "funny money" or some such but it's a good ten years plus since anyone refused to take one from me.

However, I would expect that to change post-independence if we didn't have a currency union.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think that it is also a certainty that there will also be a big run on sterling so perhaps those Scottish investors will convert to Euros or Dollars for a better deal
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps you could explain why there would be a run on sterling in these circumstances.


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 14, 2014)

If there is a currency union, what happens if either of the economies performs significantly better or worse? My poor brain suggests that you'd have something along the lines of a Germany 'v' Greece. Would either country want to be tied to another country that is dragging the value of its economy down?

And if the Scottish economy is so much stronger etc, as Alex Salmond suggest, just why does he want currency union?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 14, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			And if the Scottish economy is so much stronger etc, as Alex Salmond suggest, just why does he want currency union?
		
Click to expand...

I'm guessing because in the short term (5-10yrs maybe) during the transition period to the new steady state for each countries economy it is the most sensible and stable option?


----------



## CMAC (Aug 14, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I've travelled extensively in England and have rarely encountered issues using Scottish notes, they don't like them but still take them almost everywhere, even London cab drivers
		
Click to expand...




FairwayDodger said:



			Agreed, you often hear the same tired old joke about "funny money" or some such but it's a good ten years plus since anyone refused to take one from me.

However, I would expect that to change post-independence if we didn't have a currency union.
		
Click to expand...

you both have never obviously tried buying anything in Be*'f'*nal Green
you're lucky if they don't attack you for trying to pass off foreign currency.


----------



## Val (Aug 14, 2014)

CMAC said:



			you both have never obviously tried buying anything in Be*'f'*nal Green
you're lucky if they don't attack you for trying to pass off foreign currency.

Click to expand...

I have been in worse, got a lot of looks with my accent and Scottish tenner in Brixton, still took it though.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 14, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Perhaps you could explain why there would be a run on sterling in these circumstances.
		
Click to expand...


After you have explained why you think there will be a run on the Scottish banks.
BTW I don't think there are any Scottish [or English] banks......they are all international now.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 14, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I have been in worse, *got a lot of looks with my accent* and Scottish tenner in Brixton, still took it though.
		
Click to expand...

Thats what surprises me most, its not as if theres only a few of us and we're hardly in the big smoke, but some bars seem to go  quieter when my accent is heard as if I've just said "it's a stick up":rofl:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 14, 2014)

I was refused in a IOW cafe last year + a comment of not accepting 'funny money'.
I just said that's all I have so the stupid old fool had to back down.
Also I said I lived on the IOW and would not be giving him the chance to refuse my money again.

I generally find that they are accepted everywhere I go, but more reluctantly south of Watford.

It may surprise readers in England that Bank of England notes have a very low circulation rate in Scotland. Seldom seen.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			After you have explained why you think there will be a run on the Scottish banks.
BTW I don't think there are any Scottish [or English] banks......they are all international now.
		
Click to expand...

he didn't say that, in fact no-one did.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 14, 2014)

Sorry, getting my m's in a mucking fuddle.


----------



## williamalex1 (Aug 14, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Thats what surprises me most, its not as if theres only a few of us and we're hardly in the big smoke, but some bars seem to go  quieter when my accent is heard as if I've just said "it's a stick up":rofl:
		
Click to expand...

It's not you accent , if you dress like your Avatar ,


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			After you have explained why you think there will be a run on the Scottish banks.
BTW I don't think there are any Scottish [or English] banks......they are all international now.
		
Click to expand...

I was not aware that I had suggested there would be a run on Scottish, or any other, banks.

As you say banks are largely international these days and some effectively have HQ's in more than one country.

BTW like the kid in the HSBC advert I'm happy to accept anyone's banknotes but, like you, I have had problems using Scottish notes round here when I have returned from Scotland. Bloody annoying for a pro-union man like myself!


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 14, 2014)

CMAC said:



			you both have never obviously tried buying anything in Be*'f'*nal Green
you're lucky if they don't attack you for trying to pass off foreign currency.

Click to expand...

People around here look at you as if you are giving them a dead puppy!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 15, 2014)

Well it is real now....poll cards just dropped through the letterbox.

All starting to crank up around here, big banners in fields, posters, flags etc


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 15, 2014)

I'm currently reading Neil Ascherson's _Stone Voices: The Search for Scotland_ Pub 2003).  Ain interesting look at what made Scotland - with his insights into the Scottish psych in respect of devolution and independence - before and after the 1979 and 1997 referendum.  One thought on the 1979 referendum was that Scots were simply feart (notwithstanding the 40% rule) - and the 1997 referendum was (rather obviously) so strongly influenced by 18yrs of Conservative Westminster government and the affinity (or lack of it) that Scots felt towards the governments of those 18yrs.

Reading it I get a bit of a sinking feeling that in the event of a NO (Which I think is likely) Scotland and Scots will never feel the same again about their country.  For a start they can forget singing stuff like Scots Wha Hae and Flower of Scotland - maybe no bad thing for the latter given how it is murdered these days.  

But so much of the Scottish identity seems to me to be tied up with a distinct feeling that we are a little bit different and could and can do things our own way and better given the chance.  Well the chance is being presented and it will be rejected.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 15, 2014)

That would explain the English woman on the Andrew Neil programme saying 'The Scots, they are welcome to it, well they are not really like us are they.
I wondered who 'us' were?


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 15, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That would explain the English woman on the Andrew Neil programme saying 'The Scots, they are welcome to it, well they are not really like us are they.
I wondered who 'us' were?
		
Click to expand...

Rukers


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			and could and can do things our own way and better given the chance.
		
Click to expand...

I presume you mean those Scots that remained in Scotland and not the Anglo Scots that seemed to inhabit the south and the west of England in ever increasing numbers.

Would a yes vote stop the exodus as they (according to your statement) can do everything better when someone gives them a chance so iscot would obviously be the place to be.

_posted in this way to stop me getting a slapped wrist._


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 15, 2014)

I presume SLH has deleted his post and gone back up north.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 16, 2014)

Australian PM Tony Abbot in strange statement about Scottish Independence.

Something about a bad day for justice and freedom.........really.

We have our own justice system and we wish to have our freedom.... like Australia
He [or his wife] must be after a knighthood.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 16, 2014)

'Twas a very strange statement which did nobody any favours.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Australian PM Tony Abbot in strange statement about Scottish Independence.

Something about a bad day for justice and freedom.........really.

We have our own justice system and we wish to have our freedom.... like Australia
He [or his wife] must be after a knighthood.
		
Click to expand...

We don't have freedom anymore. We have a dictatorship ruled by High Court Judges that make up Laws for us.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 20, 2014)

Back in May Danny Alexander tells the voters of Scotland NO means Â£1400 better off by 2015-16

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/...after-no-vote-says-danny-alexander.1401273125

Today I read of a poll that surveys attitudes of voters in England towards Scotland following a NO and we discover that they would want a cut to Scottish annual public spending of almost Â£1,400 per person a year.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...ill-pay-a-heavy-price-for-referendum.25092377

Perhaps coincidental that the figures are the same - but the views of voters south of the Border if Scotland says NO comes as no surprise to me at all.

Seems to me that the Westminster politicians really need to think about what the 'south of border' public will be demanding of a NO Scotland and come up with some reassurances.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 20, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Back in May Danny Alexander tells the voters of Scotland NO means Â£1400 better off by 2015-16

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/...after-no-vote-says-danny-alexander.1401273125

Today I read of a poll that surveys attitudes of voters in England towards Scotland following a NO and we discover that they would want a cut to Scottish annual public spending of almost Â£1,400 per person a year.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...ill-pay-a-heavy-price-for-referendum.25092377

Perhaps coincidental that the figures are the same - but the views of voters south of the Border if Scotland says NO comes as no surprise to me at all.

Seems to me that the Westminster politicians really need to think about what the 'south of border' public will be demanding of a NO Scotland and come up with some reassurances.
		
Click to expand...

From a Scottish newspaper. Let me guess, the Herald is also pro Yes? Can't say I have come across this opinion much "down here". Westminster probably have more important issues than "reassuring" about something that may or may not happen.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 20, 2014)

I won't be demanding anything after a NO vote - I will be happy that the UK will still be as one

Why would I demand more money ? 

Seems a lot of spin from people desperate for a yes vote


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 20, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			From a Scottish newspaper. Let me guess, the Herald is also pro Yes? Can't say I have come across this opinion much "down here". Westminster probably have more important issues than "reassuring" about something that may or may not happen.
		
Click to expand...

Future of England Survey 2014 - see also Guardian today

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/20/scottish-independence-referendum-english-attitudes

The Herald has not yet stated it's position.  The Sunday Herald (separate newspaper) is YES


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 20, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I won't be demanding anything after a NO vote - I will be happy that the UK will still be as one

Why would I demand more money ? 

Seems a lot of spin from people desperate for a yes vote
		
Click to expand...

It's got nothing to do with the YES campaign.  See Leader in today's Scotsman (most probably a NO).  Scots to be punished for flirting with independence??

http://www.scotsman.com/news/leader-comment-english-opinion-on-independence-1-3514693

The same survey says that the vast majority of voters south of the border want Scotland to stay in the UK, but that if it goes it's own way then it should be on it's own.  

I was a bit surprised that the majority in the survey would not want rUK/Westminster to support a Scotland application to join the EU or NATO.  Not whether they think Scotland would get in - but that they don't seem to WANT Scotland in the EU or NATO.  Even although with the latter Scotland is talked of by BT as if it is a cornerstone of NATO.  If you want Scotland in the EU and/or NATO you'd surely want your politicians to support any applications.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 20, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It's got nothing to do with the YES campaign.  See Leader in today's Scotsman (most probably a NO).  Scots to be punished for flirting with independence??

http://www.scotsman.com/news/leader-comment-english-opinion-on-independence-1-3514693

The same survey says that the vast majority of voters south of the border want Scotland to stay in the UK, but that if it goes it's own way then it should be on it's own.  

I was a bit surprised that the majority in the survey would not want rUK/Westminster to support a Scotland application to join the EU or NATO.  Not whether they think Scotland would get in - but that they don't seem to WANT Scotland in the EU or NATO.  Even although with the latter Scotland is talked of by BT as if it is a cornerstone of NATO.  If you want Scotland in the EU and/or NATO you'd surely want your politicians to support any applications.
		
Click to expand...

If Scotland want independence then have it without the need of the support of the rest of the nations they have decided to leave 

It appears it's not really independence is it - it's taking bits to do on their own but wanting help with other bits.


----------



## Val (Aug 20, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Back in May Danny Alexander tells the voters of Scotland NO means Â£1400 better off by 2015-16

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/...after-no-vote-says-danny-alexander.1401273125

Today I read of a poll that surveys attitudes of voters in England towards Scotland following a NO and we discover that they would want a cut to Scottish annual public spending of almost Â£1,400 per person a year.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...ill-pay-a-heavy-price-for-referendum.25092377

Perhaps coincidental that the figures are the same - but the views of voters south of the Border if Scotland says NO comes as no surprise to me at all.

Seems to me that the Westminster politicians really need to think about what the 'south of border' public will be demanding of a NO Scotland and come up with some reassurances.
		
Click to expand...

Did you get asked by an official poll about this? If not then do you know anyone who has been asked by an official poll? And again if not, what sort of credibility does the poll have if it states it's findings as " four to one - 56 per cent as opposed to 12 per cent"

And again I'd argue four to one dramatises the figure when in reality it's not even close as it's 56 people in every 100 that allegedly think this with 12 people saying no and by assumption the remain 32 people don't know or don't care.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 20, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			From a Scottish newspaper. Let me guess, the Herald is also pro Yes? Can't say I have come across this opinion much "down here". Westminster probably have more important issues than "reassuring" about something that may or may not happen.
		
Click to expand...


The Herald is not pro yes.The Sunday Herald is.They have separate editorial positions and that's been made very clear.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 20, 2014)

I'm off to listen to George Galloway tonight (Porty Town Hall for those in the area)


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm off to listen to George Galloway tonight (Porty Town Hall for those in the area)
		
Click to expand...

Portobello?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 20, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Westminster probably have more important issues than "reassuring" about something that may or may not happen.
		
Click to expand...

Really?  The possible break-up of the UK is not the most important thing for Westminster to worry about?  Maybe it isn't...


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 20, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Really?  The possible break-up of the UK is not the most important thing for Westminster to worry about?  Maybe it isn't...
		
Click to expand...

I think, as has been pointed out in here a few times, no-one believes them anyway, whatever they say! So why waste their breath...


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 20, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Really?  The possible break-up of the UK is not the most important thing for Westminster to worry about?  Maybe it isn't...
		
Click to expand...

With the current situation in the Middle East I would suggest that possible Scottish independence is definitely not the most important issue for the Government of the UK.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 20, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Portobello?
		
Click to expand...

Yes


----------



## CMAC (Aug 20, 2014)

I wonder what all the YES voters would say, or vote, if they were told that if it's a yes then anyone who voted yes has to stay in Scotland for a min 10 yrs to reap what you sow!
:mmm:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 20, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I wonder what all the YES voters would say, or vote, if they were told that if it's a yes then anyone who voted yes has to stay in Scotland for a min 10 yrs to reap what you sow!
:mmm:
		
Click to expand...

I wonder how some people concoct these scenarios sometimes.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I wonder how some people concoct these scenarios sometimes.
		
Click to expand...

probably the same way you concocted yours about anyone who even remotely thinks about leaving should leave:rofl:

However, mine is more valid, as how will Scotland look if the people who put her there (the yes voters) all start to leave the sinking ship a few years in when they realise its all not sustainable.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 20, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I wonder what all the YES voters would say, or vote, if they were told that if it's a yes then anyone who voted yes has to stay in Scotland for a min 10 yrs to reap what you sow!
:mmm:
		
Click to expand...

Good one...


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 20, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28743834

This is an interesting (but largely insignificant in the grand scheme of things) perspective to look at...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 20, 2014)

CMAC said:



			probably the same way you concocted yours about anyone who even remotely thinks about leaving should leave:rofl:

However, mine is more valid, as how will Scotland look if the people who put her there (the yes voters) all start to leave the sinking ship a few years in when they realise its all not sustainable. 

Click to expand...

What if that argument is reversed, Scotland really flourishes and then they start chucking out all the No voters


----------



## Slab (Aug 20, 2014)

I see a former bbc gravy train driver is suggesting Scotland is at risk of losing Strictly etc if Yes win (not sure if that's to promote a Yes or No vote to be honest) but the point is mute, just another person who doesn't realise this vote isn't about next weeks programming on the tellybox


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 20, 2014)

Slab said:



			I see a former bbc gravy train driver is suggesting Scotland is at risk of losing Strictly etc if Yes win (not sure if that's to promote a Yes or No vote to be honest) but the point is mute, just another person who doesn't realise this vote isn't about next weeks programming on the tellybox
		
Click to expand...

Ach no probelmo - SBC would always be able to fall back on the White Heather Club for the dancing.  And so dear viewer we present Strictly Scottish Country Dancing - bring it on!!


----------



## CMAC (Aug 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			What if that argument is reversed, *Scotland really flourishes and then they start chucking out all the No voters*

Click to expand...

no need, they will have left already:thup:


----------



## Slab (Aug 20, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Ach no probelmo - SBC would always be able to fall back on the White Heather Club for the dancing.  And so dear viewer we present Strictly Scottish Country Dancing - bring it on!!
		
Click to expand...

Grew up watching Thingummyjig and it never did me any harm (well apart from the Fran & Anna dude)

Anyway with the expected 25% loss in revenue I doubt bbc will even be making strictly post Yes


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 20, 2014)

CMAC said:



			no need, they will have left already:thup:
		
Click to expand...

That'll be be the 700,000 then that'll be heading our way looking for homes and jobs.  Or maybe the 700,000 will all be Rangers supporters and will pop off to NI and set up their own NI Rangers FC


----------



## Val (Aug 20, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28743834

This is an interesting (but largely insignificant in the grand scheme of things) perspective to look at...
		
Click to expand...

Insignificant from a potential iScotland perspective but more concerning from a rUK perspective.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 20, 2014)

Out of interest IF the Yes vote win have any of the rUK residents given any thought as to what you will call yourselves and what will your flag look like. I assume the Anthem will stay the same.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 20, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			That'll be be the 700,000 then that'll be *heading our way looking for homes and jobs*.  Or maybe the 700,000 will all be Rangers supporters and will pop off to NI and set up their own NI Rangers FC 

Click to expand...

Translated as- injecting money into the English system, bringing jobs and contributing more tax. :smirk:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Out of interest IF the Yes vote win have any of the rUK residents given any thought as to what you will call yourselves and what will your flag look like. I assume the Anthem will stay the same.
		
Click to expand...

And Verse Two will once more apply - confound their politics and frustrate their knavish tricks


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 20, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Translated as- injecting money into the English system, bringing jobs and contributing more tax. :smirk:
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps and perchance finding jobs - through if all the businesses who say they might leave Scotland carry through on it then they will indeed *bring *the jobs with them.  But they can't bring their houses. Anyway - it's not going to happen. Going to be a NO.  As Jim Sillars said about the Scots following the 1979 referendum debacle - the Scots were feart.  And despite the noise emanating from north of the border I suspect many still are.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 20, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Perhaps and perchance finding jobs - through if all the businesses who say they might leave Scotland carry through on it then they will indeed *bring *the jobs with them.  But they can't bring their houses. Anyway - it's not going to happen. Going to be a NO.  As Jim Sillars said about the Scots following the 1979 referendum debacle - t*he Scots were feart.  And despite the noise emanating from north of the border I suspect many still are*.
		
Click to expand...

nothing to do with being 'feart'. The majority are sensible and see past the obnoxious anti English haze so many look through


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 20, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm off to listen to George Galloway tonight (Porty Town Hall for those in the area)
		
Click to expand...


In the event of a yes vote can we Rukers wrap him up and send him back for you to keep?      Please!


----------



## Val (Aug 20, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Anyway - it's not going to happen. Going to be a NO.  As Jim Sillars said about the Scots following the 1979 referendum debacle - the Scots were feart.  And despite the noise emanating from north of the border I suspect many still are.
		
Click to expand...

Of course people are feart. I'd suspect most in the NO camp have looked at it more objectively since 1979 given many now own homes rather than rent from the local authority so more potentially to lose should an iScotland fall on it's backside and interest rates and taxes are risen to bail the country out.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 20, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Of course people are feart. I'd suspect most in the NO camp have looked at it more objectively since 1979 given many now own homes rather than rent from the local authority so more potentially to lose should an iScotland fall on it's backside and interest rates and taxes are risen to bail the country out.
		
Click to expand...

Feart? Could someone translate for non Scots?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 20, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			In the event of a yes vote can we Rukers wrap him up and send him back for you to keep?      Please!
		
Click to expand...

And Nickie Campbell!?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 20, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Feart? Could someone translate for non Scots?
		
Click to expand...

Scared/Frightened/Afraid


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 20, 2014)

In 1979 Jim Sillars' view was that Scots were feart of devolution given all the scaremongering of _Think Twice_ - the No campaign.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 20, 2014)

So is the new Yes campaigns angle of attack that of accusing all those that are in the No bed just a bunch of feart fannys with no get up and go.


----------



## Val (Aug 20, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			So is the new Yes campaigns angle of attack that of accusing all those that are in the No bed just a bunch of feart fannys with no get up and go.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:

Val likes this post


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 21, 2014)

Valentino said:



			:rofl:

Val likes this post
		
Click to expand...

Don't think they'd use the word 'fanny' unless they meant 'bum bag'


----------



## nemicu (Aug 21, 2014)

Quick question - and I didn't check to see if it's already been asked (sorry) - but let's say for the sake of argument Scotland attains their independence....
....does this mean the Union flag would become defunct and needs a redesign? It would look pretty bland without the blue bits...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 21, 2014)

nemicu said:



			Quick question - and I didn't check to see if it's already been asked (sorry) - but let's say for the sake of argument Scotland attains their independence....
....does this mean the Union flag would become defunct and needs a redesign? It would look pretty bland without the blue bits...
		
Click to expand...

Yes ......and a new name for rUK.

Little Britain is the best I have heard so far.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 21, 2014)

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/289147-...mmends-adaptive-sterlingisation-for-scotland/

Interesting report........... got the Naysayers spin doctors spinning.
Talk it down and they talk down Thatcherism.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 21, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://news.stv.tv/scotland/289147-...mmends-adaptive-sterlingisation-for-scotland/

Interesting report........... got the Naysayers spin doctors spinning.
Talk it down and they talk down Thatcherism.
		
Click to expand...

You really need to keep up to date.

The Tory party leadership has long since ditched Thatcherism so they would certainly have little or no difficulty in dismissing any report prepared by the Adam Smith Institute.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 21, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			You really need to keep up to date.

The Tory party leadership has long since ditched Thatcherism so they would certainly have little or no difficulty in dismissing any report prepared by the Adam Smith Institute.
		
Click to expand...


Good to hear that the party leadership no longer supports Thatcherism.
Do you think that goes for the membership as well ?


----------



## Val (Aug 21, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Good to hear that the party leadership no longer supports Thatcherism.
Do you think that goes for the membership as well ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, they wouldn't be in power if they did


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Yes ......and a new name for rUK.

Little Britain is the best I have heard so far.
		
Click to expand...


Better Britain may find some support ...


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 22, 2014)

Ian Wood is a name who knows about the North Sea.He's made billions out of supplying rigs and over his career he'll know whats what.

So when he calls Salmond and The Yes campaign out for exagerating numbers you have to concede ground. The 24 billion barrels isn't 24 billion but 15-16 billion of discovered oil.

What I don't get is it was Wood himself who made the 24 billion claim, used by Salmond at the beginning of the year.It was his report that he wrote that used the 24 billion of discovered oil.Why would he now turn on that number?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Ian Wood is a name who knows about the North Sea.He's made billions out of supplying rigs and over his career he'll know whats what.

So when he calls Salmond and The Yes campaign out for exagerating numbers you have to concede ground. The 24 billion barrels isn't 24 billion but 15-16 billion of discovered oil.

What I don't get is it was Wood himself who made the 24 billion claim, used by Salmond at the beginning of the year.It was his report that he wrote that used the 24 billion of discovered oil.Why would he now turn on that number?
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps because like much else in life estimating oil reserves is a tricky and uncertain business.  Or he could have been encouraged to stress the lower end of any range of estimates he had come up with as there will be a statistical distribution of estimates.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Ian Wood is a name who knows about the North Sea.He's made billions out of supplying rigs and over his career he'll know whats what.

So when he calls Salmond and The Yes campaign out for exagerating numbers you have to concede ground. The 24 billion barrels isn't 24 billion but 15-16 billion of discovered oil.

What I don't get is it was Wood himself who made the 24 billion claim, used by Salmond at the beginning of the year.It was his report that he wrote that used the 24 billion of discovered oil.Why would he now turn on that number?
		
Click to expand...

Ian Wood should seal it for a lot of the dont knows I would hope. He has the ear of most of the big companies in O&G and when he says they dont want a separate Scotland and the revenue could run out much sooner, I would take that to the bank.


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It was his report that he wrote that used the 24 billion of discovered oil.Why would he now turn on that number?
		
Click to expand...


Perhaps the guy has had a reality check and doesn't, at a later date, wish to be accused of being full of BS....


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 27, 2014)

Swinney racks it up a tad...................http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28943041


----------



## CMAC (Aug 27, 2014)

120 captains of Industry state today the case for a Yes isn't proven.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 27, 2014)

CMAC said:



			120 captains of Industry state today the case for a Yes isn't proven.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.scribd.com/doc/237805123/Letter-to-the-Scotsman-Wed-27-Sep-2014

It's a reasonable point of view and one that I think carries more weight than any politicians words can.But Business for Scotland could also produce a similar 180 degree view.Both sides can project their own position well when the politicans get out the way......




These two sold the gold and created the perfect storm of financial deregulation and yet stand side by side pontificating to the people of Scotland about the economy?A pair of shysters.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.scribd.com/doc/237805123/Letter-to-the-Scotsman-Wed-27-Sep-2014

It's a reasonable point of view and one that I think carries more weight than any politicians words can.But Business for Scotland could also produce a similar 180 degree view.Both sides can project their own position well when the politicans get out the way......


View attachment 12050

These two sold the gold and created the perfect storm of financial deregulation and yet stand side by side pontificating to the people of Scotland about the economy?A pair of shysters.
		
Click to expand...

Would certainly agree with your latter point re: Messrs Brown & Darling but then didn't Mr Salmond used to work for RBS?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 27, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Would certainly agree with your latter point re: Messrs Brown & Darling but then didn't Mr Salmond used to work for RBS?
		
Click to expand...

Yup-




			In 1978 he entered the Government Economic Service as an Assistant Economist in the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland, part of the now defunct Scottish Office. Two years later he joined the staff of the Royal Bank of Scotland where he worked for seven years, initially as an assistant economist. In 1982 he was appointed Oil Economist, and from 1984 he worked as a bank economist as well as continuing to hold the position of Oil Economist.[12] While with the Royal Bank, he wrote and broadcast extensively for both domestic and international outlets. He also contributed regularly to oil and energy conferences. In 1983 Salmond created a "Royal Bank/BBC oil index" that is still used
		
Click to expand...

Not really the same as selling our gold or presiding over the bank collapse


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Yup-



Not really the same as selling our gold or presiding over the bank collapse
		
Click to expand...

True, but an economist!!!!!!!

One of those people who base virtually all their theories on past experience and then cannot understand why it did not work out the way they thought it would.

Perhaps also explains why so many aspiring politicians read PPE at university and why I am always very sceptical of politicians of all persuasions when they discuss economic issues.


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 27, 2014)

a lot has been made about folk leaving Scotland in the event of a yes Vote, Looking at the other side what about all the people who wont want to live under a Conservative Government or have Boris as a PM moving to Scotland?


----------



## CMAC (Aug 27, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			a lot has been made about folk leaving Scotland in the event of a yes Vote, Looking at the other side what about all the people who wont want to live under a Conservative Government or have Boris as a PM moving to Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

has there been such a poll? surprised if there hasn't especially paid for by the yes campaign to bolster up their pension and jobs claims.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



View attachment 12050

These two sold the gold and created the perfect storm of financial deregulation and yet stand side by side pontificating to the people of Scotland about the economy?A pair of shysters.
		
Click to expand...

Along with Salmond the best argument yet for a No vote if that's an example of what Sotland has in the way of elected politicians.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 27, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Along with Salmond the best argument yet for a No vote if that's an example of what Sotland has in the way of elected politicians. 

Click to expand...

So disagreeing with BT campaigners is the best reason to vote no? #newlogic


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 27, 2014)

CMAC said:



			has there been such a poll? surprised if there hasn't especially paid for by the yes campaign to bolster up their pension and jobs claims.
		
Click to expand...

I've not been asked and I've definitely been thinking about it.  99% certain I wouldn't move in next two years - after that who knows.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So disagreeing with BT campaigners is the best reason to vote no? #newlogic
		
Click to expand...

No, the poor standard of what you have up there who would be running the country is one good reason for voting no.


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 27, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			No, the poor standard of what you have up there who would be running the country is one good reason for voting no.
		
Click to expand...

Scotland does not have the monopoly of terrible politicians 

Think The shower that are in now and Boris in the wings:rofl:


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 27, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			Scotland does not have the monopoly of terrible politicians 

Click to expand...

No, just more than their fair share.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 27, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			True, but an economist!!!!!!!

One of those people who base virtually all their theories on past experience and then cannot understand why it did not work out the way they thought it would.

Perhaps also explains why so many aspiring politicians read PPE at university and why I am always very sceptical of politicians of all persuasions when they discuss economic issues.
		
Click to expand...

An Economy has occasionally been described as a gigantic ball of Jelly under pressure....when a government tries to manipulate it  (equivalent to poking a finger into it) the effect is often a rupture in some unforeseen place! It has also been likened to a balloon - similar to the Jelly analogy, but with a big enough 'prick', the whole thing explodes!


----------



## CMAC (Aug 27, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			An Economy has occasionally been described as a gigantic ball of Jelly under pressure....when a government tries to manipulate it  (equivalent to poking a finger into it) the effect is often a rupture in some unforeseen place! It has also been likened to a balloon - similar to the Jelly analogy, but with a big enough 'prick', the whole thing explodes!
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 27, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			No, just more than their fair share.
		
Click to expand...

We'll just let you keep them.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			We'll just let you keep them.
		
Click to expand...

It's the scots that keep voting them in, in a way I hope you get iscot then you can keep them all to yourselves.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 27, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			It's the scots that keep voting them in, in a way I hope you get iscot then you can keep them all to yourselves.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed, but Darling is English remember.And Brown is an empty shell, he described himself recently as 'an ex-politician'


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Indeed, but Darling is English remember.'
		
Click to expand...

By birth yes but by parentage, upbringing , education and every other measure he is one of yours so don't blame us for this one.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Indeed, but Darling is English remember.And Brown is an empty shell, he described himself recently as 'an ex-politician'
		
Click to expand...

Still drawing the salary of an MP though.

We now have Boris and Farage making their joint bid, probably be the next rUK coalition government after MacCameron resigns.
Give me Soapy over that pair anyday.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 27, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			By birth yes but by parentage, upbringing , education and every other measure he is one of yours so don't blame us for this one.
		
Click to expand...

Right, we'll keep Darling as long as you keep Barrowman, deal?


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			We now have Boris and Farage making their joint bid...
		
Click to expand...

"Joint bid" for what? Where?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 27, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			"Joint bid" for what? Where?
		
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 27, 2014)

Boris is favourite to replace Cameron as leader of Conservative party, he'd destroy Milliband in a GE.

Farage has traction and will be an MP next GE, possibly along with a few of his mates.

LibDem are done, finished.

So it's not impossible that Boris could approach Farage and his say, 6 seats, to form a coalition if required.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Boris is favourite to replace Cameron as leader of Conservative party, he'd destroy Milliband in a GE.

Farage has traction and will be an MP next GE, possibly along with a few of his mates.

LibDem are done, finished.

So it's not impossible that Boris could approach Farage and his say, 6 seats, to form a coalition if required.
		
Click to expand...

Odds of Boris being the leading party, but being 6 seats short of a majority? Very minimal I say. In addition to that, UKIP never do as well outside of European elections, so fingers crossed they fail, and can't even get Farage a seat. (fingers are crossed very very hard).


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Boris is favourite to replace Cameron as leader of Conservative party, he'd destroy Milliband in a GE.

Farage has traction and will be an MP next GE, possibly along with a few of his mates.

LibDem are done, finished.




So it's not impossible that Boris could approach Farage and his say, 6 seats, to form a coalition if required.
		
Click to expand...

By the look of it most from southern Englandshire on here  are tory voters anyway so they are quite happy with the prospect of a conservative Gov for evermore, after all they did let them buy their council house


----------



## CMAC (Aug 27, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



*Boris is favourite to replace Cameron as leader of Conservative party*, he'd destroy Milliband in a GE.

Farage has traction and will be an MP next GE, possibly along with a few of his mates.

LibDem are done, finished.

So it's not impossible that Boris could approach Farage and his say, 6 seats, to form a coalition if required.
		
Click to expand...

I really cant see that ever happening! and rightly so imo


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 27, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Odds of Boris being the leading party, but being 6 seats short of a majority? Very minimal I say. In addition to that, UKIP never do as well outside of European elections, so fingers crossed they fail, and can't even get Farage a seat. (fingers are crossed very very hard).
		
Click to expand...

OK -  but it is a horrid risk if you dread that possibility.  And even if we dismiss Farage and UKIP as being unlikely to have enough MPs to make a difference - a Boris Johnson led government - oh bloody nora!  And Salmon is berated as being a supercilious snake oil salesman; what do I make of Boris the buffoon - that statesman like figure who could well be representing the United Kingdom at Top Tables across the world.  God help us.


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 27, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I really cant see that ever happening! and rightly so imo
		
Click to expand...

lots of friends of mine in London all joked when he first put himself up for MOL, there was no way anyone would vote for him!!!!!

Two terms later!!!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 27, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			lots of friends of mine in London all joked when he first put himself up for MOL, there was no way anyone would vote for him!!!!!

Two terms later!!!

Click to expand...

Aye - there are enough folks who can't be bothered with politics and politicians so 'vote for Boris' is a hoot - it's a laugh. They say -  Look at what we've done - we've gone and got a buffoon elected to be MoL and if we make lots of positive noises about him the stupid Tories will have him for leader - as we - the public - like him.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 27, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			lots of friends of mine in London all joked when he first put himself up for MOL, there was no way anyone would vote for him!!!!!

Two terms later!!!

Click to expand...

Spot on Patricks.

Irreplaceable is a word I did not ever think would be tagged to Boris.

I find it really funny when the Londoners berate Salmond and yet they voted for Boris.
Buffoon of the first order.

I really do not want to be governed by that pair of twits [Farage and Johnson]. My postal vote is coming in soon and I think it will be a Yes.
BTW 20% of Scots are voting by post.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 27, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			lots of friends of mine in London all joked when he first put himself up for MOL, there was no way anyone would vote for him!!!!!

Two terms later!!!

Click to expand...

Mayor is a glorified Janny

Rolled out for its a knockout or opening the new tearoom


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Spot on Patricks.

Irreplaceable is a word I did not ever think would be tagged to Boris.

I find it really funny when the Londoners berate Salmond and yet they voted for Boris.
Buffoon of the first order.

I really do not want to be governed by that pair of twits [Farage and Johnson]. My postal vote is coming in soon and I think it will be a Yes.
BTW 20% of Scots are voting by post.
		
Click to expand...

Boris is no Buffoon and neither is Nigel.   These two still have a long way to go in politics and continue to gather much popular support.

It amuses me how so many people on this Forum are anti Tory and anti UKIP.  Of course they are entitled to be so but maybe they could explain the alternative that would improve our lot?   I happen to think that UKIP are just what this country needs to kick start it out of the political malaise we have sunk into.  I also seem to be in a very small minority here; please educate me as to exactly what they represent that is so bad, rather than just uttering sound bites.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 27, 2014)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/29/10-good-reasons-not-vote-ukip-nigel-farage-europe

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/02/ukip-party-bigots-lets-look-evidence


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Swinney racks it up a tad...................http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28943041

Click to expand...

Easily solved. Take out all the assets and sell of all the crown buildings. Let's an iscot start afresh.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 27, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Easily solved. Take out all the assets and sell of all the crown buildings. Let's an iscot start afresh.
		
Click to expand...

What exactly is a crown building?


----------



## williamalex1 (Aug 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			What exactly is a crown building?
		
Click to expand...

A Palace


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 27, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			A Palace
		
Click to expand...

Are they not owned by the Queen of Scotland ?


----------



## williamalex1 (Aug 27, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Are they not owned by the Queen of Scotland ?
		
Click to expand...

Who ? John Barrowman. :rofl:


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 28, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/29/10-good-reasons-not-vote-ukip-nigel-farage-europe

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/02/ukip-party-bigots-lets-look-evidence

Click to expand...

Oh! What great sources of neutral politics.    I should have quoted from the Daily Mail then :rofl:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

I see MacCameroon is using the CBI conference to lecture to us whilst hiding behind his sofa.

Shame on him, poor excuse for a Tory leader, show a bit of backbone man.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I see MacCameroon is using the CBI conference to lecture to us whilst hiding behind his sofa.

Shame on him, poor excuse for a Tory leader, show a bit of backbone man.
		
Click to expand...

A complete coward.I'd put a hefty bet that if Thatcher was still PM she'd be up here all the time debating anyone and everyone.A woman generally despised would have front up, but this PM is terrified of his image and taking a beating he's not prepared to do anything but preach to a select group of business folk.


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A complete coward.I'd put a hefty bet that if Thatcher was still PM she'd be up here all the time debating anyone and everyone.A woman generally despised would have front up, but this PM is terrified of his image and taking a beating he's not prepared to do anything but preach to a select group of business folk.
		
Click to expand...

more than likely putting a few more feelers or for when he resigns. you cant be an exec board member of too many companies


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

Makes you wonder which of the two are more unelectable now.....McCameroon or Milliband [David that is].

Race to the bottom.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 28, 2014)

Wondering about Cameron's position when a NO vote and he is pressurised from North of Border to define and commit to delivery dates for 'new powers' to be devolved to Holyrood - and at same time as being pressurised from South of Border to tell us about what the plan for is for revision of the Barnett Formula with or without these 'new powers' - and on Westminster voting reform to address the West Lothian question.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Wondering about Cameron's position when a NO vote and he is pressurised from North of Border to define and commit to delivery dates for 'new powers' to be devolved to Holyrood - and at same time as being pressurised from South of Border to tell us about what the plan for is for revision of the Barnett Formula with or without these 'new powers' - and on Westminster voting reform to address the West Lothian question.
		
Click to expand...

The West Lothian question gives a good excuse for much needed parliament reform.

Scrap the lords, elected 2nd chamber and English devolution. Reduce UK MP list by about 75%.

Sorted.....my consultancy fee of Â£3billion pounds is being sent to Westminster.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 28, 2014)

Cameron in Glasgow today addressing business leaders- apparently its now 150 Captains of industry against a yes vote.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 28, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Cameron in Glasgow today addressing business leaders- apparently its now 150 Captains of industry against a yes vote.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/200-business-people-declare-for-yes-with-an-economic-vision/

Fortunately, they all have one vote just like the respondents of this mass canvas-

http://radicalindependence.org/2014/08/19/radical-independence-campaign-18k-canvass-sample-released/


----------



## CMAC (Aug 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/200-business-people-declare-for-yes-with-an-economic-vision/

Fortunately, they all have one vote just like the respondents of this mass canvas-

http://radicalindependence.org/2014/08/19/radical-independence-campaign-18k-canvass-sample-released/

Click to expand...

yes I saw that before, theres even an owner of a business I'm involved with

They do look like small concerns like the Cluthie guest house and a dog groomers etc but you are right, one vote.

I'm hoping as the 150 are leaders of substantial business's that there will be an influence to their followers and respecters.


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/200-business-people-declare-for-yes-with-an-economic-vision/

Fortunately, they all have one vote just like the respondents of this mass canvas-

http://radicalindependence.org/2014/08/19/radical-independence-campaign-18k-canvass-sample-released/

Click to expand...

So what happened to his stance about it not being anything to do with him, it was for the people of Scotland to decide????


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 28, 2014)

CMAC said:



			yes I saw that before, theres even an owner of a business I'm involved with

They do look like small concerns like the Cluthie guest house and a dog groomers etc but you are right, one vote.

*I'm hoping as the 150 are leaders of substantial business's that there will be an influence to their followers and respecters.*

Click to expand...

the part highlighted...followers and respecters? Seriously? Do these followers and respecters still doff their cap to these leaders?It's not the 1800's you know!


----------



## CMAC (Aug 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			the part highlighted...followers and respecters? Seriously? Do these followers and respecters still doff their cap to these leaders?It's not the 1800's you know!
		
Click to expand...

I've always respected who I work for, dont you? anyone I didnt respect I moved on. Respect isnt about fear which is where your doffed cap comes from.
Surprised at you trying to stir that one, slow day?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 28, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I've always respected who I work for, dont you? anyone I didnt respect I moved on. Respect isnt about fear which is where your doffed cap comes from.
Surprised at you trying to stir that one, slow day?
		
Click to expand...

the phrase respecters and followers piqued my interest, I hadn't heard it before. I've pretty much been an employer rather than an employee all my working life and I'm not fussed if my staff respect me or not...as long as they work hard,earn their wage and don't mess about.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 28, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			the phrase *respecters and followers* piqued my interest, I hadn't heard it before. I've pretty much been an employer rather than an employee all my working life and I'm not fussed if my staff respect me or not...as long as they work hard,earn their wage and don't mess about.
		
Click to expand...

yes I phrased that badly, more influencers. Certainly any staff that report to me don't 'follow' my views nor would I want them to, they have their own mind.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 28, 2014)

..and so I hear on lunchtime news of the defection of a prominent Tory to UKIP.  Now I don't know if he is aware or that much cares that there is a referendum in three weeks and that many Scots aren't great fans of UKIP or UKIP-type policies - so why did he not wait.  Of course not very many voters in Scotland are going to be bothered about this guy - but why do this now?  Why did he just not just wait three weeks.  His defection just goes to add to a feeling that many in Scotland have that England is moving further from the traditional Scottish view on life and all that it brings us.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			..and so I hear on lunchtime news of the defection of a prominent Tory to UKIP.  Now I don't know if he is aware or that much cares that there is a referendum in three weeks and that many Scots aren't great fans of UKIP or UKIP-type policies - so why did he not wait.  Of course not very many voters in Scotland are going to be bothered about this guy - but why do this now?  Why did he just not just wait three weeks.  His defection just goes to add to a feeling that many in Scotland have that England is moving further from the traditional Scottish view on life and all that it brings us.
		
Click to expand...


On the other hand it rather lessens the theory, often peddled on here, that there will be a Tory/UKIP coalition.

After all if Douglas Carswell really thought that was likely why would he now be defecting.


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 28, 2014)

Prominent Tory ... That's stretching it a bit for a backbencher... How many will have heard of him before today? Not many I reckon...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 28, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Oh! What great sources of neutral politics.    I should have quoted from the Daily Mail then :rofl:
		
Click to expand...

You can point out where in the articles they have things wrong if you wish ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 28, 2014)

Never heard of the guy until today.But it does show there is a desire for UKIP in England, which I actually don't have an issue with...same goes for the small % of Scottish folk who also agree with (some of their policies...doubt the no sick pay/maternity pay/work contracts are too appealing)...they should be challenged and defeated or represented.

But it does look like there is a higher level of demand for UKIP in England than Scotland, so it's natural those campaigning for indy highlight this defection, and the inevitable move the Conservatives will have to make to keep their core vote happy....this guy won't be the last, and him and his type will help my cause, so I'm fine with it.


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			His defection just goes to add to a feeling that many in Scotland have that England is moving further from the traditional Scottish view on life and all that it brings us.
		
Click to expand...

What is this Scottish view of life that England is moving away from - and what about the Welsh and nthn Irish?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 28, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			What is this Scottish view of life that England is moving away from - and what about the Welsh and nthn Irish?
		
Click to expand...

I am not saying it is a fact or indeed what it is - but there is a perception that whereas Scots have pretty much maintained their general socio-political views on things, England (in particular) has gradually moved away from what back in the 1950s was a roughly common position - when Scotland voted Tory.  And the perception is that in the last 20yrs that move away has accelerated.  I do not know if this is true, but it is certainly a view I have heard expressed and expressed as being fairly commonly held.  And this simple and relatively unimportant act of a Tory MP moving to UKIP does nothing but strengthen that perception.  And it strengthens an expectation that the Tories will move to have a position on the ground the UKIP is claiming on such as the EU and immigration.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

But at the recent Euro' elections UKIP took nearly as many votes from Labour as Conservative and 10% of the vote in Scotland.

Therefore, it would seem that it will be necessary for more than the Tories to appease UKIP and as the EU do not seem to be too welcoming to an independent Scotland UKIP  would perhaps consider their job done in Scotland.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 28, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			But at the recent Euro' elections UKIP took nearly as many votes from Labour as Conservative and 10% of the vote in Scotland.

Therefore, it would seem that it will be necessary for more than the Tories to appease UKIP and as the EU do not seem to be too welcoming to an independent Scotland UKIP  would perhaps consider their job done in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

That may well in fact be true - I said that it is a perception held my many that may not actually be supported by the facts - pretty 'in your face' and clear as some of these facts may well be.

Truth is that much of the reasoning I have heard from YES and NO supporters on the whole debate makes me question rather the sense of holding referenda on important matters full stop.  I only hope that with such large numbers voting the ill-informed or badly-informed on both sides cancel each other out.

Always been my concern over an EU referendum.  The real plus points and negatives can be rather difficult to get your head around and (frankly) believe when you are assailed by wild and grand assertions from both sides.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Always been my concern over an EU referendum.  The real plus points and negatives can be rather difficult to get your head around and (frankly) believe when you are assailed by wild and grand assertions from both sides.
		
Click to expand...

But if the people don't decide who should make that decision.

I fear that you have more faith than I in our politicians.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			That may well in fact be true - I said that it is a perception held my many that may not actually be supported by the facts - pretty 'in your face' and clear as some of these facts may well be.

Truth is that much of the reasoning I have heard from YES and NO supporters on the whole debate makes me question rather the sense of holding referenda on important matters full stop.  I only hope that with such large numbers voting the ill-informed or badly-informed on both sides cancel each other out.

Always been my concern over an EU referendum.  The real plus points and negatives can be rather difficult to get your head around and (frankly) believe when you are assailed by wild and grand assertions from both sides.
		
Click to expand...

Is this another view of "people at the golf club", "people at the pub", or one of your other sources that you have referred to in the past as the all knowing? You seem to have a tendency SILH to refer to vague perceptions, and opinions, that cover a wide range of people, that fly in the face of what many others believe. It always seems to come back to general groups, rather than being supported a bit more readily!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

I shall take your 150 Business men/women's votes and raise it by 1million

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...ependence-1-million-sign-yes-pledge-1-3518108


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 28, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You can point out where in the articles they have things wrong if you wish ?
		
Click to expand...

Lets start with all of them! :smirk:

Now; in your own words explain where they are correct !


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 28, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			But if the people don't decide who should make that decision.

I fear that you have more faith than I in our politicians.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe we should have a body like the Monetary Policy Committee to provide advice and guidance to the politicians and public alike on matters such as the benefits/costs/drawbacks of EU.  In truth I do have a reasonable amount of faith in our politicians.  I do not believe that they are all the same and just in it for themselves.  It is an easy and lazy approach to take to dismiss and rubbish out of hand what our politicians say without actually bothering to properly understand what they say.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 28, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Is this another view of "people at the golf club", "people at the pub", or one of your other sources that you have referred to in the past as the all knowing? You seem to have a tendency SILH to refer to vague perceptions, and opinions, that cover a wide range of people, that fly in the face of what many others believe. It always seems to come back to general groups, rather than being supported a bit more readily!
		
Click to expand...

OK - fair point I guess as I don't have any opinion polls immediately to hand to support my pov.  But having listened to a lot of debates and read a lot of articles and message boards I can assure you that there is a section of the Scottish electorate that believe England has moved away from Scotland on many socio-political matters.  You don't have to believe me if you don't want to but I believe it to be the case,


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Maybe we should have a body like the Monetary Policy Committee to provide advice and guidance to the politicians and public alike on matters such as the benefits/costs/drawbacks of EU.  In truth I do have a reasonable amount of faith in our politicians.  I do not believe that they are all the same and just in it for themselves.  It is an easy and lazy approach to take to dismiss and rubbish out of hand what our politicians say without actually bothering to properly understand what they say.
		
Click to expand...


I certainly do not subscribe to the view that they "are just in it for themselves".

However, I have little or no respect for "professional politicians", whatever their party who followed the well trodden path of University, intern, Research Officer, MP and then, if lucky, front bench.

It is the growing preponderance of these that makes me realise the benefits of a second chamber, (preferably elected).

As for understanding what politicians say, first one must consider the position from which they may be speaking and then strip their statements of "spin".


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			OK - fair point I guess as I don't have any opinion polls immediately to hand to support my pov.  But having listened to a lot of debates and read a lot of articles and message boards I can assure you that there is a section of the Scottish electorate that believe England has moved away from Scotland on many socio-political matters.  You don't have to believe me if you don't want to but I believe it to be the case,
		
Click to expand...

I'm not disputing that, and I appreciate you are much wider read than me on this issue, but it could be a case of not listening to the voice shouting the loudest. As with the golf forum, the pov put across by many on here isn't exactly representative of the majority of golfers.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			OK - fair point I guess as I don't have any opinion polls immediately to hand to support my pov.  But having listened to a lot of debates and read a lot of articles and message boards I can assure you that there is a section of the Scottish electorate that believe England has moved away from Scotland on many socio-political matters.  You don't have to believe me if you don't want to but I believe it to be the case,
		
Click to expand...


I find it hard to understand how this portion of the Scottish electorate to which you refer can make such a sweeping generalisation about the attitudes of the English voters. If an Englishman made a similar assertion about the Scots I cannot help but feel that he might be accused of stereotyping.


After all there are around ten English to every one Scottish so to paint them all the same political "colour" is lazy presumption to the point of arrogance.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I'm not disputing that, and I appreciate you are much wider read than me on this issue, but it could be a case of not listening to the voice shouting the loudest. As with the golf forum, the pov put across by many on here isn't exactly representative of the majority of golfers.
		
Click to expand...

I think the plain fact that Scotland has one Tory MP and the UK is presently governed by the Tories [and a handful of dead men walking] speaks louder than any shouting voice.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think the plain fact that Scotland has one Tory MP and the UK is presently governed by the Tories [and a handful of dead men walking] speaks louder than any shouting voice.
		
Click to expand...

Up until 2010 the UK had a Labour prime minister. Are you really suggesting the political opinions of all of those in England have diverged massively over the last 4 years?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think the plain fact that Scotland has one Tory MP and the UK is presently governed by the Tories [and a handful of dead men walking] speaks louder than any shouting voice.
		
Click to expand...

The size of the average constituency in Scotland, particularly across the Central Belt, distorts the figures.

In 2010 the results in Scotland were :-



Labour                                                42% of the vote, 41 seats                                             
Lib/Dem                                              19% of the vote, 11 seats                                             
SNP                                                    20% of the vote, 6 seats                                              
Conservative                                        16.5%, 1 seat

So it would appear that when talking about under-representation you should really be concerning yourself with Scottish Conservatives and, to a lesser extent the SNP.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Up until 2010 the UK had a Labour prime minister. Are you really suggesting the political opinions of all of those in England have diverged massively over the last 4 years?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, since Milliband was elected as Labour leader.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Yes, since Milliband was elected as Labour leader.
		
Click to expand...


Remember folks this considered judgement of the English electorate was brought to you by DfT , your resident (in Scotland that is) expert on English voting intentions.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 28, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Oh! What great sources of neutral politics.    I should have quoted from the Daily Mail then :rofl:
		
Click to expand...

While I *totally agree* with the above.... and one of them was almost 2 years old!



SocketRocket said:





Liverpoolphil said:



			You can point out where in the articles they have things wrong if you wish ?
		
Click to expand...

Lets start with all of them! :smirk:

Now; in your own words explain where they are correct !
		
Click to expand...

However, the above registers a new level in 'SocketLogic'! 

Plenty wrong with certain areas of the EU, but it seems to me that Scots are more inclined to a lot of Europe's policies/approaches than to England's.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 28, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Remember folks this considered judgement of the English electorate was brought to you by DfT , your resident (in Scotland that is) expert on English voting intentions.
		
Click to expand...

All I said about this is that there is a *perception* in some - perhaps many - in Scotland that England has moved to the right and away from Scotland.  I did not say that England *has* moved to the right.  You are arguing that I am saying England *has * - and I am not - even although there does appear to be some evidence to support that view. Is it not possible for you to accept that - and if you accept that then you can maybe see how a Tory MP defecting to UKIP simply 'adds fuel to that fire'.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 28, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			your resident (in Scotland that is).
		
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			What exactly is a crown building?
		
Click to expand...

Crown buildings and Crown estates is land and property owned by the British Government.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 28, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			The size of the average constituency in Scotland, particularly across the Central Belt, distorts the figures.

In 2010 the results in Scotland were :-



Labour                                                42% of the vote, 41 seats                                             
Lib/Dem                                              19% of the vote, 11 seats                                             
SNP                                                    20% of the vote, 6 seats                                              
Conservative                                        16.5%, 1 seat

So it would appear that when talking about under-representation you should really be concerning yourself with Scottish Conservatives and, to a lesser extent the SNP.
		
Click to expand...

I believe those figures are rather different to the ones for The Scottish Assembly! That would indicate to me that, at least many, Scots are, quite reasonably, making different decisions about who to vote for in UK Elections - reckoning SNP is a 'wasted' vote, but anyone but the Conservatives!


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			All I said about this is that there is a *perception* in some - perhaps many - in Scotland that England has moved to the right and away from Scotland.  I did not say that England *has* moved to the right.  You are arguing that I am saying England *has * - and I am not - even although there does appear to be some evidence to support that view. Is it not possible for you to accept that - and if you accept that then you can maybe see how a Tory MP defecting to UKIP simply 'adds fuel to that fire'.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not disputing the perception but I would say that the vast majority of northern English are closer, politically, to Scotland than they are to the south east of England. Oop north has always been predominantly Labour, whereas the SE is where the majority of Conservative constituencies reside.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Remember folks this considered judgement of the English electorate was brought to you by DfT , your resident (in Scotland that is) expert on English voting intentions.
		
Click to expand...

Well I have lived in England longer than many of the English posters on here so, if that is a compliment..thank you.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

Anyway.........has Cameron come out from behind the sofa. If so did he say anything worthwhile, has he tried to buy any more votes or has he resigned yet.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I believe those figures are rather different to the ones for The Scottish Assembly! That would indicate to me that, at least many, Scots are, quite reasonably, making different decisions about who to vote for in UK Elections - reckoning SNP is a 'wasted' vote, but anyone but the Conservatives!
		
Click to expand...

The Conservatives share of the vote showed the smallest change and, in any event, the Assembly elections are based upon PR, something I would advocate for all elections.

I doubt, however, if many Labour supporters would feel the same due to the inbuilt advantage the "first past the post" system gives them with comparatively smaller constituencies in their Scottish and Northern inner-city heartlands.

Fewer votes needed to elect a Labour MP than a Conservative.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Well I have lived in England longer than many of the English posters on here so, if that is a compliment..thank you.
		
Click to expand...

Certainly not a compliment as your ill informed ramblings on the attitudes of the English electorate add little illumination to this debate.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

I just love Brian Taylor, knocks all of the political commentators into a cocked hat.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-28965482


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			All I said about this is that there is a *perception* in some - perhaps many - in Scotland that England has moved to the right and away from Scotland.  I did not say that England *has* moved to the right.  You are arguing that I am saying England *has * - and I am not - even although there does appear to be some evidence to support that view. Is it not possible for you to accept that - and if you accept that then you can maybe see how a Tory MP defecting to UKIP simply 'adds fuel to that fire'.
		
Click to expand...

As I said previously this perception is the type of generalisation that, if directed at your fellow Scots, would rightly attract charges of lazy stereotyping.

Perhaps it is more a preconception than a perception, or possibly even a prejudice,


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 28, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			I'm not disputing the perception but I would say that the vast majority of northern English are closer, politically, to Scotland than they are to the south east of England. Oop north has always been predominantly Labour, whereas the SE is where the majority of Conservative constituencies reside.
		
Click to expand...

If you check the results map, I believe you will find that it's a Labour's strength, seat winning wise, is in the Cities. Mind you, that doesn't indicate how much the seats were won by, just the fact that they were won. The map is predominantly Blue, so non-City areas are definitely Conservative dominated!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Kingdom_general_election_results_in_England


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			I'm not disputing the perception but I would say that the vast majority of northern English are closer, politically, to Scotland than they are to the south east of England. Oop north has always been predominantly Labour, whereas the SE is where the majority of Conservative constituencies reside.
		
Click to expand...

The results of the 2010 Election suggests otherwise, although I suppose it depends how you define the North.

Have a look at the results map post 2010, there is an awful lot of blue north of Birmingham right up to the Borders.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Certainly not a compliment as your ill informed ramblings on the attitudes of the English electorate add little illumination to this debate.
		
Click to expand...

So tell me, since Milliband was elected has the Kippers share of the vote increased or decreased?
A simple yes or no will do:smirk:


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So tell me, since Milliband was elected has the Kippers share of the vote increased or decreased?
A simple yes or no will do:smirk:
		
Click to expand...

Yes, throughout the UK


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 28, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			If you check the results map, I believe you will find that it's a Labour's strength, seat winning wise, is in the Cities. Mind you, that doesn't indicate how much the seats were won by, just the fact that they were won. The map is predominantly Blue, so non-City areas are definitely Conservative dominated!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Kingdom_general_election_results_in_England

Click to expand...

And if you look at the size of the Conservative constituencies, geographically, you'll see that the number of constituencies won by the blues is relatively small compared to those by the reds. Its people that vote, not areas. More people voted red than blue...


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Aug 28, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			And if you look at the size of the Conservative constituencies, geographically, you'll see that the number of constituencies won by the blues is relatively small compared to those by the reds. Its people that vote, not areas. More people voted red than blue...
		
Click to expand...


In South Yorkshire & Tyne and Wear that is true but a different picture in much of the rest of the North and that includes total share of the popular vote.

Certainly more voted Labour than Conservative but then we have a coalition Government and more voted for the Coalition parties than for Labour.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So tell me, since Milliband was elected has the Kippers share of the vote increased or decreased?
A simple yes or no will do:smirk:
		
Click to expand...

Simple Yes


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 28, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			And if you look at the size of the Conservative constituencies, geographically, you'll see that the number of constituencies won by the blues is relatively small compared to those by the reds. Its people that vote, not areas. More people voted red than blue...
		
Click to expand...

True enough - but it's (virtually only) around the Cities - even London that Labour performs best. They (Liverpool/Manchester greater areas and Northumberland) just happen to be 'North'. Lower population density areas are generally Conservative - all over the Country. The Blue dominance of Home Counties is signifcant though.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 28, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Plenty wrong with certain areas of the EU, but it seems to me that Scots are more inclined to a lot of Europe's policies/approaches than to England's.
		
Click to expand...

I suggest you contemplate your own Logic.  I am being told that 'possibly' the majority of Scots want to break away from the United Kingdom as they wish to have more control of their political and cultural destiny but they are also more inclined towards a United State of Europe where the interference with their future would be far greater.    Wheres the logic in that.

Thanks in anticipation of a grown up reply. :thup:


----------



## ger147 (Aug 28, 2014)

Not too late for any ex-pats without a vote to get involved...

http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides...h-independence-referendum-votes-sold-on-ebay/


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Not too late for any ex-pats without a vote to get involved...

http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides...h-independence-referendum-votes-sold-on-ebay/

Click to expand...

Rumour is that Borders Police have raided a house in Farnham.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 28, 2014)

SocketRocket said:





Foxholer said:



			Plenty wrong with certain areas of the EU, but it seems to me that Scots are more inclined to a lot of Europe's policies/approaches than to England's.
		
Click to expand...

I suggest you contemplate your own Logic.  I am being told that 'possibly' the majority of Scots want to break away from the United Kingdom as they wish to have more control of their political and cultural destiny but they are also more inclined towards a United State of Europe where the interference with their future would be far greater.    Wheres the logic in that.

Thanks in anticipation of a grown up reply. :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Seems like you are actually agreeing with me!


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 28, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Seems like you are actually agreeing with me!
		
Click to expand...

Not really.  I was suggesting a paradox in that they want to be set free from Westminster only to be shackled by Brussels.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 28, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Not really.  I was suggesting a paradox in that they want to be set free from Westminster only to be shackled by Brussels.
		
Click to expand...

Er. You were *also* suggesting that it - ditching Westminster for Brussels/Strasbourg - was a paradox.....

Everything else was a wordy rephrasing along the same lines as my point!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 28, 2014)

Essex seems to be revolting.

Clacton Tory MP quits to join the Kippers.
One off, or the first of many do you think?


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Essex seems to be revolting.

Clacton Tory MP quits to join the Kippers.
One off, or the first of many do you think?
		
Click to expand...

Clacton is indeed one of the more revolting parts of Essex!

Problem is that there is nowhere else for seriously Euro-skeptic MPs to go!

At least he has done what I believe is the right thing to do and resigned as MP, so that Clacton can select either him personally or the Conservatives - or whoever else - in the same way they elected him in 2010.

I think many of the undoubted other Euro-Skeptics will wait to see what happens in the By-Election before making a decision. If it goes against the Conservatives, then they may decide that they are better to put additional pressure on the leadership from within.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 28, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Rumour is that Borders Police have raided a house in Farnham.
		
Click to expand...

LOL


----------



## JCW (Aug 28, 2014)

The view is that Scotland will break away and thats how the voting looks like going ,  But come the day when people have to vote for real and it then counts you may well be surprised they dont want to break away , alone in the ballot box , how many times have you gone to vote only to change your mind at the very last , I know i have more then once


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 28, 2014)

And so it starts.  At some point the quiet people will make their decisions and the chickens will indeed come home to roost.   Knock the Kippers if you must but Nigel will not go away.


----------



## ger147 (Aug 29, 2014)

JCW said:



			The view is that Scotland will break away and thats how the voting looks like going ,  But come the day when people have to vote for real and it then counts you may well be surprised they dont want to break away , alone in the ballot box , how many times have you gone to vote only to change your mind at the very last , I know i have more then once
		
Click to expand...

Opinion polls have consistently shown Yes in the lead so I have no idea where you get the idea that is the way the vote looks like going. Every opinion poll currently indicates the opposite.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Aug 29, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Opinion polls have consistently shown Yes in the lead so I have no idea where you get the idea that is the way the vote looks like going. Every opinion poll currently indicates the opposite.
		
Click to expand...

I thought "No" was, and always has been, in the lead?


----------



## ger147 (Aug 29, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I thought "No" was, and always has been, in the lead?
		
Click to expand...

The most unfortunate of unfortunate typos. That's what happens when you go back and edit.

I'll be in the corner facing the wall if anyone needs me...


----------



## ger147 (Aug 29, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Opinion polls have consistently shown No in the lead so I have no idea where you get the idea that is the way the vote looks like going. Every opinion poll currently indicates the opposite.
		
Click to expand...

What I was trying to say...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 29, 2014)

ger147 said:



			The most unfortunate of unfortunate typos. That's what happens when you go back and edit.

I'll be in the corner facing the wall if anyone needs me...
		
Click to expand...

Yes - curious that JCW has that perception


----------



## CMAC (Aug 29, 2014)

JCW said:



*The view is that Scotland will break away and thats how the voting looks like going* ,  But come the day when people have to vote for real and it then counts you may well be surprised they dont want to break away , alone in the ballot box , how many times have you gone to vote only to change your mind at the very last , I know i have more then once
		
Click to expand...

wheres that tosh coming from?


----------



## CMAC (Aug 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I just love Brian Taylor, knocks all of the political commentators into a cocked hat.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-28965482

Click to expand...

Christ! was was that serious comment. Very Fat man comments on the FOOD at PM's meeting. Jees!


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 29, 2014)

CMAC said:



			wheres that tosh coming from?
		
Click to expand...

EYT

Enjoy your Tosh


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 29, 2014)

CMAC said:



			wheres that tosh coming from?
		
Click to expand...

It does look more likely now than ever.Polls tightening and even then, pollsters can't call those without a landline, and those without a landline are generally in housing schemes and generally inclined to vote aye.

my Â£200 @ 12/1 last winter looks better everyday


----------



## CMAC (Aug 29, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It does look more likely now than ever.Polls tightening and even then, pollsters can't call those without a landline, and those without a landline are *generally in housing schemes and generally inclined to vote aye.*

my Â£200 @ 12/1 last winter looks better everyday
		
Click to expand...

I saw that in a Scotland report recently, it's the main battleground for the yes campaign- when you see the conditions many live in the reporter made a good point "most are voting yes as they have nothing to lose"


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 29, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I saw that in a Scotland report recently, it's the main battleground for the yes campaign- when you see the conditions many live in the reporter made a good point "most are voting yes as they have nothing to lose"
		
Click to expand...

If Yes mobilise the housing schemes they win, it's as simple as that. It's a big if,though.

Also interesting to see that Glasgow is majority yes according to recent surveys, which ties in with the above too, I suppose.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 29, 2014)

Round oor way it only seems to be the rich farmers who are promoting NOxThanks.

Salmond performed well on the Radio Scotland phone in this morning.

My Mrs was getting quite agitated listening to a rude caller on the show and comes out with......He dosen't seem to realise that if every single Scot voted for Donald Duck we would still get Mickey Mouse as a UK prime minister.
Made me laugh.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Round oor way it only seems to be the rich farmers who are promoting NOxThanks.

Salmond performed well on the Radio Scotland phone in this morning.

My Mrs was getting quite agitated listening to a rude caller on the show and comes out with......He dosen't seem to realise that if every single Scot voted for Donald Duck we would still get Mickey Mouse as a UK prime minister.
Made me laugh.
		
Click to expand...

Better than Brown


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Round oor way it only seems to be the rich farmers who are promoting NOxThanks.

Salmond performed well on the Radio Scotland phone in this morning.

My Mrs was getting quite agitated listening to a rude caller on the show and comes out with......He dosen't seem to realise that if every single Scot voted for Donald Duck we would still get Mickey Mouse as a UK prime minister.
Made me laugh.
		
Click to expand...

soon England will be getting the worst cartoon character of the lot ..... Boris the Baboon


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 29, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			soon England will be getting the worst cartoon character of the lot ..... Boris the Baboon

Click to expand...

If you have visited London in the past 4 years you might be surprised how much good has been done by the Baboon and his team for those visiting the area.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 29, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			If you have visited London in the past 4 years you might be surprised how much good has been done by the Baboon and his team for those visiting the area.
		
Click to expand...

Has he had the bulldozers flatten parts of it then.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Has he had the bulldozers flatten parts of it then.

Click to expand...

I think that's being reserved for Glasgow.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 29, 2014)

Disgusting behaviour by the YES campaigners...allegedly. Seems to be organised mobs........God help us.

http://bettertogether.net/blog/entry/statement-from-jim-murphy-on-suspending-his-tour


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 29, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Disgusting behaviour by the YES campaigners...allegedly. Seems to be organised mobs........God help us.

http://bettertogether.net/blog/entry/statement-from-jim-murphy-on-suspending-his-tour

Click to expand...

Aye, not good. The guy who chocked the eggs has been seen following Murphy about recently and there's pictures if him from yesterday with one of those discrete ear piece thingmys the police use. I've seen it suggested it was coordinated by either camp for their own reasons. I personally think it was a daftie acting on his own, just like the guy who sent the death threat to jim Sillars


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 29, 2014)

Shame as it has been a pretty civilised debate up to know.
Not a good image for Scotland.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 29, 2014)

http://m.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/scottish-independence-campaigner-80-attacked-1-3077094

As I say, both sides have idiots


----------



## CMAC (Aug 29, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://m.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/scottish-independence-campaigner-80-attacked-1-3077094

As I say, both sides have idiots
		
Click to expand...

not quite on the same scale


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 29, 2014)

CMAC said:



			not quite on the same scale
		
Click to expand...

No a broken wrist to an 80 year old man is not on the same scale as ugly words and a broken egg.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 29, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			No a broken wrist to an 80 year old man is not on the same scale as ugly words and a broken egg.
		
Click to expand...

dont be such a nob! you know exactly what was meant if you read both articles which I assume you did?

You are clearly a YES supporter but try not to completely ignore facts in a vain attempt to belittle this serious mob organised mentality.


----------



## fundy (Aug 30, 2014)

you have to laugh at some people 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...cottish-referendum-votes-on-ebay-9698408.html


----------



## Hobbit (Aug 30, 2014)

fundy said:



			you have to laugh at some people 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...cottish-referendum-votes-on-ebay-9698408.html

Click to expand...

Probably sold to help fill the black hole in the proposed, post Yes, budget/wishlist:ears:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 30, 2014)

Perhaps Jim should have shown a more robust defense.......now who was that throwing the eggs again? 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XTiI1e-wVc


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 30, 2014)

Galloway has taken a bit of a beating in London this week... Reckon you guys north of the wall must be waiting for his return home with open arms following a yes vote... You are thoroughly welcome to him!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 30, 2014)

No thanks x.

He is disliked on both sides of the border.
Fortunately the only place he can get elected is in England.


----------



## Dodger (Aug 30, 2014)

If ever there was something to make me want a YES this is it seen at Ibrokes today.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 30, 2014)

You don't like flags then.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 30, 2014)

Dodger said:



			If ever there was something to make me want a YES this is it seen at Ibrokes today.






Click to expand...

Big boost for the yes voters........they are so dim that they probably do not even understand what they are doing.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 30, 2014)

Elephants back in the room then. Always amazed me how they hated the flag but didn't mind living south of the border.


----------



## MegaSteve (Aug 30, 2014)

Dodger said:



			If ever there was something to make me want a YES this is it seen at Ibrokes today.






Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			Big boost for the yes voters........they are so dim that they probably do not even understand what they are doing.
		
Click to expand...


Someone once said, on this forum, that only those born north of the wall are capable of humanity ....


----------



## 2blue (Aug 30, 2014)

JCW said:



			The view is that Scotland will break away and thats how the voting looks like going ,  But come the day when people have to vote for real and it then counts you may well be surprised they dont want to break away , alone in the ballot box , how many times have you gone to vote only to change your mind at the very last , I know i have more then once
		
Click to expand...

NO....  NEVER...... It's so simple......   Leopards don't change their spots   Tories are un-caring but take care of the rich...  simples


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 30, 2014)

2blue said:



			NO....  NEVER...... It's so simple......   Leopards don't change their spots   Tories are un-caring but take care of the rich...  simples 

Click to expand...

Tories, now if you said politicians I would have given you a like.


----------



## 2blue (Aug 30, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Tories, now if you said politicians I would have given you a like.
		
Click to expand...

Well....   you are in the Deep South   so bound to be a bit out of touch


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 30, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Someone once said, on this forum, that only those born north of the wall are capable of humanity ....
		
Click to expand...

Friday night, second house, Glasgow Empire there not!  :smirk:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 30, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Friday night, second house, Glasgow Empire there not!  :smirk:
		
Click to expand...

:lol:


----------



## Iaing (Aug 30, 2014)

Anyone ever perused the Better Together boards?
Funny how many say that in the event of a yes vote, they will move to *Ulster*.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 30, 2014)

So Putin tells Europe: 'Don't mess with us, we have Nuclear Weapons'

Does it seem like a good time to become Nuclear Free?


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 30, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			So Putin tells Europe: 'Don't mess with us, we have Nuclear Weapons'

Does it seem like a good time to become Nuclear Free?
		
Click to expand...

It would be M.A.D. to have them!


----------



## Iaing (Aug 30, 2014)

Barry McGuire - Eve Of Destruction: http://youtu.be/qfZVu0alU0I


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 30, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Friday night, second house, Glasgow Empire there not!  :smirk:
		
Click to expand...

I remember Mike & Bernie Winters bringing the house down.

They threw bricks at them


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 30, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			It would be M.A.D. to have them!
		
Click to expand...

Was it not Nukes that kept the USSR in check.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 30, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I remember Mike & Bernie Winters bringing the house down.

They threw bricks at them

Click to expand...

Des O'Connor had a good night.  Less people were asking for their money back!


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 31, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Was it not Nukes that kept the USSR in check.
		
Click to expand...

You mean like Hungary and Czechoslovakia?

Or were they needed to 'save' Finland, Norway and Sweden?

MAD may or may not have kept them in check. Of course USSR would likely argue that it was their MAD arsenal that kept 'The West' in check!

It certainly wasn't the presence of US Nuclear Weapons based in Scotland's that did it though! and Scotland going Nuclear Weapon Free won't change any Defence strategy, just logistics. And, according to the White Paper, Scotland intends being a member of NATO in the same way other non-nuclear countries are.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 31, 2014)

Dodger said:



			If ever there was something to make me want a YES this is it seen at Ibrokes today.






Click to expand...

why?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 31, 2014)

Jim Sillars was in Niddrie last week on his Margo mobile... A group if folk, sympathies unknown, egged him.He bollocked them and told them those eggs would be better served feeding some of the local families relying on food banks.He got on with it and nothing reported in the press.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Aug 31, 2014)

Oh Dear........The Kippers will be holding a Pro Union rally in Glasgow.
Cameroon and Darling must be sooooooo pleased with that.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 31, 2014)

Best quote "I'm Scottish therefore have a right to moan" Great script writing in Dr Who.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Aug 31, 2014)

Any see any reporting on the arson attack of the yes Scotland shop in Glasgow? Me neither.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Aug 31, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Any see any reporting on the arson attack of the yes Scotland shop in Glasgow? Me neither.
		
Click to expand...

Is it being reported in Scotland ?


----------



## ger147 (Aug 31, 2014)

http://youtu.be/nQgNxIeM4c8


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 1, 2014)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-denied-a-say-in-the-country-they-defend.html


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 1, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-denied-a-say-in-the-country-they-defend.html

Click to expand...

Good article but the politicians set the rules, they are the ones behind this huge cock up.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 1, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-denied-a-say-in-the-country-they-defend.html

Click to expand...


I nearly cried reading that soul stirring article.They joined up, left Scotland and made the conscious choice to do so.

Suck it up.And stay in the UK armed forces or join a new Scottish force, your choice.We'll survive either way.

This is called democracy, don't like it? Move elsewhere.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 1, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Good article but the politicians set the rules, they are the ones behind this huge cock up.
		
Click to expand...

Salmond explained this on the radio the other morning.
He very much wanted to include all Scots born on the pole but the legal guys said is was a nightmare.
It was the same in 1997.

Re the soldiers...is there any difference between Scots who chose a medical, diplomatic, sporting, finance etc career.
If those soldiers had a home in Scotland they would have a vote.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I nearly cried reading that soul stirring article.They joined up, left Scotland and made the conscious choice to do so.

Suck it up.And stay in the UK armed forces or join a new Scottish force, your choice.We'll survive either way.

This is called democracy, don't like it? Move elsewhere.
		
Click to expand...

What an interesting response towards the people that have signed to protect people like you enabling you to be able to have free speech and join the Scots Guard - a Scottish regiment with such proud Scottish History - yet you dismiss with ease. I wonder what your reaction would be if they all wanted to vote yes.

Yes it's a democracy - maybe have some respect for the people that allow it stay a democracy and protect this country.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 1, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What an interesting response towards the people that have signed to protect people like you enabling you to be able to have free speech and join the Scots Guard - a Scottish regiment with such proud Scottish History - yet you dismiss with ease. I wonder what your reaction would be if they all wanted to vote yes.

Yes it's a democracy - maybe have some respect for the people that allow it stay a democracy and protect this country.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not interested in how they would vote...and some of them would vote yes I guess.

Now, where's my tiny wee violin...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 1, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What an interesting response towards the people that have signed to protect people like you enabling you to be able to have free speech and join the Scots Guard - a Scottish regiment with such proud Scottish History - yet you dismiss with ease. I wonder what your reaction would be if they all wanted to vote yes.

Yes it's a democracy - maybe have some respect for the people that allow it stay a democracy and protect this country.
		
Click to expand...

Everyone in the UK Army signed up to protect me, not just the Scots Guards.
They made a decision to move to England where the Scots Guards are based...no different to Hogan.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Now, where's my tiny wee violin...
		
Click to expand...

Why do you guys choose musical instruments that make such an awful noise.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Salmond explained this on the radio the other morning.
He very much wanted to include all Scots born on the pole but the legal guys said is was a nightmare.
It was the same in 1997.
		
Click to expand...

Or it might would give a large block of votes to the No campaign more likely.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 1, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Why do you guys choose musical instruments that make such an awful noise.
		
Click to expand...

It's like an echo chamber for Liverpoolphils posts


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It's like an echo chamber for Liverpoolphils posts
		
Click to expand...

No, he's capable of annoying all on his own.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 1, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-denied-a-say-in-the-country-they-defend.html

Click to expand...

Another empty, but emotive, piece of propoganda imo.

The 'Yes' side could easily argue that it was Westminster that decided to move the Regiment, so it was Westminster that disenfranchised them! And that it is really a classic example of why Scotland should be independent and making decisions for Scots!

I presume The Scots Guards also fought in that illegal Gulf 2 conflict as well!


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I presume The Scots Guards also fought in that illegal Gulf 2 conflict as well!
		
Click to expand...

It was a handful of Scots and ANO who convinced parliament it was legal at the time.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 1, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			It was a handful of Scots and ANO who convinced parliament it was legal at the time.
		
Click to expand...

And parliament didn't have the bollocks to stand up to them.Both as guilty as each other and the perfect example of why we should vote yes.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 1, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What an interesting response towards the people that have signed to protect people like you enabling you to be able to have free speech and join the Scots Guard - a Scottish regiment with such proud Scottish History - yet you dismiss with ease. I wonder what your reaction would be if they all wanted to vote yes.

Yes it's a democracy - maybe have some respect for the people that allow it stay a democracy and protect this country.
		
Click to expand...

But in the context of the referendum they have no more or no less interest in Scotland than I.  Whilst I can seem the emotional aspect of this - it is their job.  

Many folk down here in England who know me well have expressed great surprise that I don't get a vote, and have said it is wrong that I don't.  But their views are based upon their recognition of the emotional attachment I obviously have for my country - never mind my broad accent even after 30 yrs away   And never mind that they don't have any understanding of the real practical family issues that make it important to me how Scotland is run and it socio-economic policies.

I don't have a vote - I am long past holding any resentments about that.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 1, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			It was a handful of Scots and ANO who convinced parliament it was legal at the time.
		
Click to expand...

Ah yes! :rofl: The leader of which is now a 'Peace Envoy' for Middle East. Doing a great job there too!

Apparently performing better advising 'dictators' how to spin their 'massacres'! And throws a good birthday party apparently too!  All courtesy of the Daily Mail's obsession with tarring the poor (hardly!) man - just back from another 'luxury freebie' of the coast of Sicily.


----------



## Slab (Sep 1, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But in the context of the referendum they have no more or no less interest in Scotland than I.  Whilst I can seem the emotional aspect of this - it is their job.  

Many folk down here in England who know me well have expressed great surprise that I don't get a vote, and have said it is wrong that I don't.  But their views are based upon their recognition of the emotional attachment I obviously have for my country - never mind my broad accent even after 30 yrs away   And never mind that they don't have any understanding of the real practical family issues that make it important to me how Scotland is run and it socio-economic policies.

I don't have a vote - I am long past holding any resentments about that.
		
Click to expand...

Agree. I may have 'popped out' for a handful of years but until relatively recently I spent my whole life there but currently don't get a vote. 

I knew when I took this job it meant not getting a vote in the referendum but that doesn't mean I don't care or have an opinion (I just don't have a voice that counts, but it was still my choice to leave)


----------



## Val (Sep 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I nearly cried reading that soul stirring article.They joined up, left Scotland and made the conscious choice to do so.

Suck it up.And stay in the UK armed forces or join a new Scottish force, your choice.We'll survive either way.

This is called democracy, don't like it? Move elsewhere.
		
Click to expand...

Ignorance beyond belief. Disappointed to read that from you.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			And parliament didn't have the bollocks to stand up to them.Both as guilty as each other and the perfect example of why we should vote yes.
		
Click to expand...

I always assumed (wrongly) by some of your posts you were in the NO camp. It all makes sense now.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 1, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Ignorance beyond belief. Disappointed to read that from you.
		
Click to expand...

Well I'm disappointed that the vote is going to be close.The ability to self determine should be automatic, and given Scotland would be the first country given the option to decline that opportunity, that would be not only disappointing, but rather embarrassing.



CMAC said:



			I always assumed (wrongly) by some of your posts you were in the NO camp. It all makes sense now.
		
Click to expand...

You are joking, right? 1500 + posts on this forum and pretty much exclusively about the referendum ( fell out of love with golf a few years ago) and there's a lingering doubt about my voting intentions? I need to try harder!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 1, 2014)

Slab said:



			Agree. I may have 'popped out' for a handful of years but until relatively recently I spent my whole life there but currently don't get a vote. 

I knew when I took this job it meant not getting a vote in the referendum but that doesn't mean I don't care or have an opinion (I just don't have a voice that counts, but it was still my choice to leave)
		
Click to expand...

...and whilst at home (in Glasgow) recently I realised the #1 reason I should be disqualified - no matter what - from having a vote.  I found myself listen to Kenneth McKellar - The Song of the Clyde - and I was singing along and enjoying it


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Well I'm disappointed that the vote is going to be close.The ability to self determine should be automatic, and given Scotland would be the first country given the option to decline that opportunity, that would be not only disappointing, but rather embarrassing.
		
Click to expand...

<deep sigh>

We already have self determination. You just want it within a smaller constituency.


----------



## Slab (Sep 1, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and whilst at home (in Glasgow) recently I realised the #1 reason I should be disqualified - no matter what - from having a vote.  I found myself listen to Kenneth McKellar - The Song of the Clyde - and I was singing along and enjoying it 

Click to expand...

Ouch!

For my part I've cunningly arranged for a _No_ voter to come out here for a holiday that spans the 18th in an effort to negate my ability to vote Yes


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 1, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			<deep sigh>

We already have self determination. You just want it within a smaller constituency.
		
Click to expand...

<roles eyes>

So we can determine how to spend our taxes fully,then? We've decided that nukes are actually good and we should'nt increase military spending over the nominal 2%?

I missed all that, but good to know.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			<roles eyes>

So we can determine how to spend our taxes fully,then? We've decided that nukes are actually good and we should'nt increase military spending over the nominal 2%?

I missed all that, but good to know.
		
Click to expand...

By that logic, if after a Yes vote, you get rid of Nukes, if all of the Shetland Isles (or another area) wanted Nukes, then they wouldn't have self determination, and should therefore become independent?

By having a vote per person on the same basis as everyone else in the UK, yes, you have self determination.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 1, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			By that logic, if after a Yes vote, you get rid of Nukes, if all of the Shetland Isles (or another area) wanted Nukes, then they wouldn't have self determination, and should therefore become independent?

By having a vote per person on the same basis as everyone else in the UK, yes, you have self determination.
		
Click to expand...

Is Shetland a country within The UK?If we're gonna use comparitors, lets use ones that work.Scotland isn't a region/area and the sooner that's realised the better.

Spoke to my accountant today, a very vocal NO voter and he's very nervous, to the point he's looking for property in England as he can see a simplification of the tax code and him being redundant as a result of independence.He's *not *a happy chappy with how the unionists have performed.

A prime example being how inaccurate the polling has been.I told him I couldn't care less about polling as I can see what's happening and don't need some polling company to tell me, but he was at pains to have the conversation.

To be polled you need a landline or be prepared to answer your door to a cold caller.The section of society that is less inclined to to do either? The housing scheme dwellers.How are they inclined to vote?Yes.The uptake of voting registrations for these areas in the last two months? Something like 70-80% if RIC etc are to be believed.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 1, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			<roles eyes>

So we can determine how to spend our taxes fully,then? We've decided that nukes are actually good and we should'nt increase military spending over the nominal 2%?

I missed all that, but good to know.
		
Click to expand...

Your sarcasm is most unbecoming. You are intelligent enough to recognise the simple truth of my point. We are part of the UK electorate that has voted in every government we've had. I'm not happy with many policies put in place by governments for whom I personally did not vote but I recognise that I took part in a democratic process.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 1, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Your sarcasm is most unbecoming. You are intelligent enough to recognise the simple truth of my point. We are part of the UK electorate that has voted in every government we've had. I'm not happy with many policies put in place by governments for whom I personally did not vote but I recognise that I took part in a democratic process.
		
Click to expand...

I love sarcasm.I love being undone by it and attempting to undo others.The finest written art humanity has invented, and I'm not being sarcastic.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 1, 2014)

80% turnout estimated.
That is quite amazing.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			80% turnout estimated.
That is quite amazing.
		
Click to expand...

If that happens, whatever the result Scotland should pat themselves on the back


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 1, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			... I found myself listen to Kenneth McKellar - The Song of the Clyde - and I was singing along and enjoying it 

Click to expand...

Yikes! That's a name - and a song - from the deep past!

His voice featured in quite a bit of our families 'entertainment'!


----------



## Imurg (Sep 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			80% turnout estimated.
.
		
Click to expand...

And how are they estimating that?
By using polls which, by all accounts, are inaccurate......?


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 1, 2014)

Imurg said:



			And how are they estimating that?
By using polls which, by all accounts, are inaccurate......?
		
Click to expand...

Deserves a like


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 1, 2014)

Imurg said:



			And how are they estimating that?
By using polls which, by all accounts, are inaccurate......?
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 1, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



View attachment 12117

Click to expand...

Ahh but it all depends on the questions they ask.

Will you vote.........yes.
How will you vote........for you of course [lying through teeth]


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 1, 2014)

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics...neral-sir-richard-shirreff-s-letter-1-3526265


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 1, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics...neral-sir-richard-shirreff-s-letter-1-3526265

Click to expand...

That's a view of an extremely well qualified man whose focus for his recent career has been to make himself virtually redundant!

And while his argument is eloquent, as a democracy his vote counts only as much as anyone else's.

I actually detest military folk who get too involved with political matters. It's really not an area they should get particularly involved in imo!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Yikes! That's a name - and a song - from the deep past!

His voice featured in quite a bit of our families 'entertainment'!
		
Click to expand...

Aye - mine also - but to find myself singing along and enjoying it...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Yougov poll for The Times and The Sun: No 53%, Yes 47%  Now that is pretty much neck and neck.  And as this is a binary vote there could be huge variances from the polls - with only 3 voters in 100 changing their minds from No to Yes for it to be 50:50


----------



## CMAC (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yougov poll for The Times and The Sun: No 53%, Yes 47%  Now that is pretty much neck and neck.  And as this is a binary vote there could be huge variances from the polls - with only 3 voters in 100 changing their minds from No to Yes for it to be 50:50
		
Click to expand...

a poll each or 1 joint poll for 2 totally different audiences? got a link for the stats?

2 years of polling and I still dont know anyone who's ever been polled


----------



## Slab (Sep 2, 2014)

The real shame in the whole referendum is that with the result likely to be edged by only a few points either way, almost half the voting population aren't going to be happy and I'm not completely comfortable that a victory by say 55/45 is sufficient mandate to leave... or stay!


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics...neral-sir-richard-shirreff-s-letter-1-3526265

Click to expand...




Foxholer said:



			That's a view of an extremely well qualified man whose focus for his recent career has been to make himself virtually redundant!

And while his argument is eloquent, as a democracy his vote counts only as much as anyone else's.

I actually detest military folk who get too involved with political matters. It's really not an area they should get particularly involved in imo!
		
Click to expand...

I too have a mistrust of military men who advise in the political arena. However, he does make some excellent points and raise some very pointed questions. And some of those questions make it very clear that the Whitepaper is just plain naive in the area of defence, assuming NATO is the way forward for Scotland. 

Maybe, just maybe, he's the right person asking the right questions about defence.


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yougov poll for The Times and The Sun: No 53%, Yes 47%  Now that is pretty much neck and neck.  And as this is a binary vote there could be huge variances from the polls - with only 3 voters in 100 changing their minds from No to Yes for it to be 50:50
		
Click to expand...

And the bookies have it about 1/4 for the No vote and 3/1 for the Yes.
Work that out then if the polls put it so close.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 2, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			I too have a mistrust of military men who advise in the political arena. However, he does make some excellent points and raise some very pointed questions. And some of those questions make it very clear that the Whitepaper is just plain naive in the area of defence, assuming NATO is the way forward for Scotland. 

Maybe, just maybe, he's the right person asking the right questions about defence.
		
Click to expand...

A White Paper covering the way a country is likely to be run - without venturing into Party Politics - which is what that document is, is bound to be 'naive' in places - I'd call it 'shallow'.

He might be the right (sort of) person to implement the final policy. But only after having had his overall budget set in concrete! A General  (or whatever) will always see a good reason to spend more money on Defence. The key to affordable Defence is making the optimum Defence with the resources available - another key skill for top level Military folk! 

The whole point of the White Paper is that, as a small country, Scotland's Defence Needs and Role will change. And that's on top of the issue of Faslane etc.



Beezerk said:



			And the bookies have it about 1/4 for the No vote and 3/1 for the Yes.
Work that out then if the polls put it so close.
		
Click to expand...

Well most of the Bookies customers are neither Scottish, nor Voting - and Scottish Bookies, with Voting punters, would have to follow the majority - the non-Scottish, non-Voting ones anyway!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics...neral-sir-richard-shirreff-s-letter-1-3526265

Click to expand...

Does this person have a vote?my skim reading of it suggests not.So he can comment all he likes, but the jakey round the corner in Leith Walk who's just registered his vote is more important and relevant than this joker.

Carry on GI Joe, and fwiw, I hope we don't get into NATO


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Does this person have a vote?my skim reading of it suggests not.So he can comment all he likes, but the jakey round the corner in Leith Walk who's just registered his vote is more important and relevant than this joker.

Carry on GI Joe, and fwiw, I hope we don't get into NATO
		
Click to expand...

It is quite funny that when someone posts someone negative towards a yes vote with some actual facts and someone from a position who actually provides a valuable insight - ie defence which is one of the points in the white paper - you just dismiss it out of hand.

I have no doubt that if he was backing the yes campaign you would embrace him with open arms 

His comments are very very relevant to the future if a yes vote happened.


----------



## Val (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Does this person have a vote?my skim reading of it suggests not.So he can comment all he likes, but the jakey round the corner in Leith Walk who's just registered his vote is more important and relevant than this joker.

Carry on GI Joe, and fwiw, I hope we don't get into NATO
		
Click to expand...

Why are you showing such a dislike to the UK military?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It is quite funny that when someone posts someone negative towards a yes vote with some actual facts and someone from a position who actually provides a valuable insight - ie defence which is one of the points in the white paper - you just dismiss it out of hand.

I have no doubt that if he was backing the yes campaign you would embrace him with open arms 

His comments are very very relevant to the future if a yes vote happened.
		
Click to expand...

I honestly don't care what anyone who doesn't have a vote thinks about this referendum, good or bad...although the general mood outside Scotland seems to be vote no, which make me wonder why as we're generally seen as weight around the neck of England, or at least we used to be until folk started educating themselves out of their own ignorance.

It's another doomsday scenario, where Scottish independence results in cataclysmic domino affects in Europe,NATO and the entire world.Anyone who thinks that an independent Scotland would pose some kind of threat to security live sin a parallel universe to me.I expect Scotland to meet its obligations in the correct manner as does any right thinking person.We just want the opportunity to make the decisions ourselves, and I think folk like the lad we're discussing is more concerned about rUks lack of ability to continue down the road they're heading without the facilities,finance and men Scotland provides.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 2, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Why are you showing such a dislike to the UK military?
		
Click to expand...

I didn't think I was.I respect the jobs the forces do, one I wouldn't be prepared to do myself.I'm calling him irrelevant to this debate ( unless he has a vote?) He's a joker, an agent of fear, perpetuating this line that Scottish independence would result in a domino affect of failure, well I call bullshit.

Scotland will meet its obligations, they might not be in line with what Westminster and the MoD would like, but tough luck on that one, as it would appear to me that Scottish citizens are realizing there are important issues other than the military that need out tax Â£.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 2, 2014)

I didn't know this, but learned yesterday that UK citizens who have lived abroad for less than 15 years are still eligible to vote in general elections.

I know a Scottish doctor currently working in Australia on a 2 year temporary visa but coming back next year who would very much like a vote and (while I don't think long term absentees like SILH should get a vote) I do tend to agree with her that she should be entitled to do so.

It's not as black and white as some would make out and very wrong to be so disparaging of those who have legitimate concerns and useful insight just because they have been disenfranchised for this particular vote.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

Never once thought of Scotland as a weight around anyone's neck nor have I ever seen or heard anyone suggest such a thing 

Or is that making judgments from a small percentage

The worst thing this referendum has done has ruined a wonderful relationship between the two countries - all ruined by bitterness and lots of nastiness 

One of the heads of NATO has pretty much ripped apart the white paper in terms of defence - you may not care but that is someone actually in the position to comment - if the defence area of the white paper ( which I mentioned months ago ) is such a mess with no clear thought wonder what that says about the rest. 

You expect Scotland to meet it's requirements in regards defence - well their is a high ranking officer in the know who states that you won't be able too. I wonder who is in a better position to judge.


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I honestly don't care what anyone who doesn't have a vote thinks about this referendum, good or bad...although the general mood outside Scotland seems to be vote no, which make me wonder why as we're generally seen as weight around the neck of England, or at least we used to be until folk started educating themselves out of their own ignorance.
		
Click to expand...

I don't know how many English folk you've spoken to about the referendum but methinks you're judgement is way off the mark. I'd suggest the regular English person doesn't really have any idea about the financial implications Scotland have being in the UK, they just think it's a pretty place to go on holiday.
I stand by what I touched upon the other day, Scottish bitterness towards the English is what seems to be driving some Yes votes.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			..although the general mood outside Scotland seems to be vote no, which make me wonder why as we're generally seen as weight around the neck of England, or at least we used to be until folk started educating themselves out of their own ignorance.
		
Click to expand...

Yes there does seem to be more than a bit of a sea change there.

The stark reality of facts rather than what they thought were facts.

Those taking umbridge about the defense comments really cannot picture a Scots Defense Force and a rUK Defense Force.
rUk will have to find a lot of money if they want the rUK Force to be on a par with a UK Force.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Never once thought of Scotland as a weight around anyone's neck nor have I ever seen or heard anyone suggest such a thing 

Or is that making judgments from a small percentage

The worst thing this referendum has done has ruined a wonderful relationship between the two countries - all ruined by bitterness and lots of nastiness 

One of the heads of NATO has pretty much ripped apart the white paper in terms of defence - you may not care but that is someone actually in the position to comment - if the defence area of the white paper ( which I mentioned months ago ) is such a mess with no clear thought wonder what that says about the rest. 

You expect Scotland to meet it's requirements in regards defence - well their is a high ranking officer in the know who states that you won't be able too. I wonder who is in a better position to judge.
		
Click to expand...

As I repeat, whatever he says makes no difference, just like yours, his opinion counts for nowt.


And I keep hearing about this bitterness and nastiness.Seriously? Darling and Carmichael mention it loads, as does Murphy.Robust debate and the capacity to reduce each others point of view is what I see.Grow a set and get tore in, or sit this one out and go talk about over paid footballers.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 2, 2014)

Beezerk said:



			I don't know how many English folk you've spoken to about the referendum but methinks you're judgement is way off the mark. I'd suggest the regular English person doesn't really have any idea about the financial implications Scotland have being in the UK, they just think it's a pretty place to go on holiday.
I stand by what I touched upon the other day, Scottish bitterness towards the English is what seems to be driving some Yes votes.
		
Click to expand...

Not against the English, except for a few sad cases, more against Westminster/London and the distribution of wealth


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not against the English, except for a few sad cases, more against Westminster/London and the distribution of wealth
		
Click to expand...

Like the rest of us then mate :thup:


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			As I repeat, whatever he says makes no difference, just like yours, his opinion counts for nowt.
		
Click to expand...

Up until now, I thought you were coming across with some valid, well thought out points, and I could see why you believed in the Yes vote as much as you do.

Completely dismissing any opinions out of hand if they can't vote, however, is just crazy. 

If a world leading economist from Germany (insert any country outside of Scotland) turned around and said it would 90% destroy the Scottish economy to vote Yes, OR, it would actually almost definitely result in a massive boost, could you ignore that?! 

You refer to the man on the street who is uninformed, would you not prefer he researched the opinions of those *significantly* more informed, or do you want him to vote based on a popularity contest, on who has the bigger balls, Salmond or Darling.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			As I repeat, whatever he says makes no difference, just like yours, his opinion counts for nowt.


And I keep hearing about this bitterness and nastiness.Seriously? Darling and Carmichael mention it loads, as does Murphy.Robust debate and the capacity to reduce each others point of view is what I see.Grow a set and get tore in, or sit this one out and go talk about over paid footballers.
		
Click to expand...

I expect his opinion on Scotland ability to meet their defence obligations is far more relevant than yours 

And just because people don't have a vote doesn't mean they have a valid opinion same with companies etc which express worry over a yes vote which you keep dismissing 

Prob maybe cause you don't want to hear that actually it is possible that going Independant might not be such a good idea and may have a very big detreminatial effect to Scotland and it's people and could damage the county beyond repair - but you don't want to even think that's possible 

And bitterness - just read your posts - they stink of bitterness towards the English - in the probable event of a no vote I expect that bitterness to get even worse.


----------



## Val (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I didn't think I was.I respect the jobs the forces do, one I wouldn't be prepared to do myself.I'm calling him irrelevant to this debate ( unless he has a vote?) He's a joker, an agent of fear, perpetuating this line that Scottish independence would result in a domino affect of failure, well I call bullshit.
		
Click to expand...

You are, when opinions differ from you you bat them down with comments of "Carry on GI Joe" its very disrespectful.

In the grand scale of things his opinion is worthless when you view the fact that he doesn't live in Scotland and doesnt get a vote, however his opinion is relevant when he explains from a position of experience that manpower numbers explained in the white paper don't add up, it's not scaremongering, it's fact. He comments as follows;

*"There is no mention of any naval aviation (yet Scotland would need a primarily naval force), no mention of air-to-air refuelling capability, no Mountain Rescue and no Search & Rescue capability. The White Paper proposals are dangerous and would leave Scotland, the UK and NATO weakened and less capable of dealing with the threats of today and tomorrow.  Scotland deserves better"*

Also

*"As an example of the incoherence of SNP thinking, there are currently six infantry/Guards/Royal Marine units that are Scottish (or Scottish based) plus a further company of Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders. Yet the White Paper commits to only three such units. More bizarre, the SNP commits to reinstating all the Scottish infantry battalions lost in 2006. It simply doesnâ€™t add up. And even if it did, where does this leave the young men who are serving with such distinction in the Royal Regiment of Scotland and made it the regiment which Scotland and all Scots can take such pride in?"*

Whether we are in NATO or not these paragraph's are very worrying IMO.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not against the English, except for a few sad cases, more against Westminster/London and the distribution of wealth
		
Click to expand...

That's relevant for the English and Welsh as well


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 2, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Up until now, I thought you were coming across with some valid, well thought out points, and I could see why you believed in the Yes vote as much as you do.

Completely dismissing any opinions out of hand if they can't vote, however, is just crazy. 

If a world leading economist from Germany (insert any country outside of Scotland) turned around and said it would 90% destroy the Scottish economy to vote Yes, OR, it would actually almost definitely result in a massive boost, could you ignore that?! 

You refer to the man on the street who is uninformed, would you not prefer he researched the opinions of those *significantly* more informed, or do you want him to vote based on a popularity contest, on who has the bigger balls, Salmond or Darling.
		
Click to expand...

My belief in an indy Scotland is just that, my belief.I don't expect anyone to hold the same opinion or agree.There is countless opinions within Scotland, on both sides, more than enough, maybe too many.To add to that with folk with nothing in the game makes no sense to me.I've been to listen to George Galloway, I've stood and debated and been shouted down and applauded.He has no say and I've told him so.I can't take anyone seriously who has the opinion that Scotland would fail financially.We contribute our fair share already and we'll be just fine...it won't be perfect, but it'll be as perfect as we can make it, making decisions in our best interest.



Liverpoolphil said:



			I expect his opinion on Scotland ability to meet their defence obligations is far more relevant than yours 

And just because people don't have a vote doesn't mean they have a valid opinion same with companies etc which express worry over a yes vote which you keep dismissing 

Prob maybe cause you don't want to hear that actually it is possible that going Independant might not be such a good idea and may have a very big detreminatial effect to Scotland and it's people and could damage the county beyond repair - but you don't want to even think that's possible 

And bitterness - just read your posts - they stink of bitterness towards the English - in the probable event of a no vote I expect that bitterness to get even worse.
		
Click to expand...

I'm seriously not bitter about England/English people.This year alone I've been to London twice, Manchester once,Leicester once and Newcastle too.Visiting my sister and other relatives/friends.I seriously like England as a country and think it offers a very good alternative to Scotland, in both pace of life, population demographics and outlook on society, becuase I do think for everything that makes us alike, there are things that make us different.None of that will change, we'll still have a love/hate relationship with sport, we'll still buy Warbuttons bread and Boddingtons and you'll still buy Shortbread and Irn Bru.

Scotland will not be damaged beyond repair, and if you think that's a possibility you think very little of Scotland and it's people.



Valentino said:



			You are, when opinions differ from you you bat them down with comments of "Carry on GI Joe" its very disrespectful.

In the grand scale of things his opinion is worthless when you view the fact that he doesn't live in Scotland and doesnt get a vote, however his opinion is relevant when he explains from a position of experience that manpower numbers explained in the white paper don't add up, it's not scaremongering, it's fact. He comments as follows;

*"There is no mention of any naval aviation (yet Scotland would need a primarily naval force), no mention of air-to-air refuelling capability, no Mountain Rescue and no Search & Rescue capability. The White Paper proposals are dangerous and would leave Scotland, the UK and NATO weakened and less capable of dealing with the threats of today and tomorrow.  Scotland deserves better"*

Also

*"As an example of the incoherence of SNP thinking, there are currently six infantry/Guards/Royal Marine units that are Scottish (or Scottish based) plus a further company of Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders. Yet the White Paper commits to only three such units. More bizarre, the SNP commits to reinstating all the Scottish infantry battalions lost in 2006. It simply doesnâ€™t add up. And even if it did, where does this leave the young men who are serving with such distinction in the Royal Regiment of Scotland and made it the regiment which Scotland and all Scots can take such pride in?"*

Whether we are in NATO or not these paragraph's are very worrying IMO.
		
Click to expand...

As I said, I skim read that article as I don't really care what he thinks.He's worries about his armed forces being depleted, funding being reduced and potentially some ( not many maybe) deciding they want to join a Scottish force.And anyone hanging their entire argument on what The SNP want is missing the much bigger picture...what if Labour win the 1st Scottish elections post yes? Have they had the balls to announce what their plans are?Do they have a plan B on anything? I think it gross negligence to not have contingency plans in place...it's common knowledge The SNP have contingency plans in case No wins, which is quite correct.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			a poll each or 1 joint poll for 2 totally different audiences? got a link for the stats?

2 years of polling and I still dont know anyone who's ever been polled

Click to expand...

What stats you looking for?  Read The Times today if you want the poll.

And 3 NO voters changing their minds are unlikely to vote 'undecided'.  So 53/47 becomes 50/50

That said I think projections made by pollsters for a YES/NO like this could be hugely wrong because as far as I can see individual voting intentions are not easily defined according to socio-economic or any other parameters or background.  How the pollsters actually select their 'representative' sample I just don't know.  So the polls could be wildly wrong.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Slab said:



			The real shame in the whole referendum is that with the result likely to be edged by only a few points either way, almost half the voting population aren't going to be happy and I'm not completely comfortable that a victory by say 55/45 is sufficient mandate to leave... or stay!
		
Click to expand...

I had a thought on this as it seems to me that whereas a very narrow NO would perhaps be OK (because it implies status quo), a very narrow YES could well be problematic and not very digestible.  In the case of a very narrow YES perhaps it would have been appropriate to seek the view of the Scottish diaspora.  In an 'advisory' way either to confirm the YES or to say 'think again' - and send the vote back to be re-run.


----------



## Val (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			As I said, I skim read that article as I don't really care what he thinks.He's worries about his armed forces being depleted, funding being reduced and potentially some ( not many maybe) deciding they want to join a Scottish force.And anyone hanging their entire argument on what The SNP want is missing the much bigger picture...*what if Labour win the 1st Scottish elections post yes? Have they had the balls to announce what their plans are?Do they have a plan B on anything? I think it gross negligence to not have contingency plans in place...it's common knowledge The SNP have contingency plans in case No wins, which is quite correct.*

Click to expand...

A very good point and something I have to admit to not considering.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It's another doomsday scenario, where Scottish independence results in cataclysmic domino affects in Europe,NATO and the entire world.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think we have to worry too much about Scotland being a source of world instability when we have the situation in the Ukraine where NATO is putting together a rapid response force that could be sent into the Ukraine if Putin and Russia continue along their current track. So if you are worried about the impact an independent Scotland would have on the future stability of the world - fret not - Russia with Ukraine and NATO have that particular risk tied up today.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 2, 2014)

Valentino said:



			A very good point and something I have to admit to not considering.
		
Click to expand...

The entire debate is being framed in a very narrow corridor.Does it really matter about military or currency?Does anyone seriously think we'll be decimated by yes?We'll have no money or no soldiers?Doe sthe demand for clarity on answers from Salmond by Darling really progress things?Why does the white paper have to be the reference point for everything?The SNP or Labour or Conservative or Green are not that important.

Everything, everything will work itself out as best as possible.Will it be better than rUK?I don't actually care.I'm not competing with rUk to be better than them, just the same.Will be get into the EU?Probably, but so what?Same applies to NATO.Folk are framing this entire debate in such a narrow perspective it's a crying shame.We're debating (sometimes agressively, but tahts good imo) the rebirth of a nation, one that would want to be a good partner, a responsible neighbour and a contributing society.A nation that wants to take responsibility and accountability for itself.For me, thats awesome.Terrifying,exciting and draining all at the same time and I cannae wait.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Never once thought of Scotland as a weight around anyone's neck nor have I ever seen or heard anyone suggest such a thing
		
Click to expand...

Maybe not where you live but down here I hear it all the time in the context of per head spending - especially as Scots get free prescriptions, university fees etc.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			That's relevant for the English and Welsh as well
		
Click to expand...

Well fortunately Scots are now in a position to do something about it if they want...

It's not Scotland's fault that the rest of us currently can't.  I find odd the argument that says that because England and Wales can't have or do something then why should Scotland?  Well the thing is - Scotland can - though they prob won't


----------



## CMAC (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



*The entire debate is being framed in a very narrow corridor.Does it really matter about military or currency?Does anyone seriously think we'll be decimated by yes?We'll have no money or no soldiers?Doe sthe demand for clarity on answers from Salmond by Darling really progress things?Why does the white paper have to be the reference point for everything?*The SNP or Labour or Conservative or Green are not that important.

*Everything, everything will work itself out as best as possible*.Will it be better than rUK?I don't actually care.I'm not competing with rUk to be better than them, just the same.Will be get into the EU?Probably, but so what?Same applies to NATO.Folk are framing this entire debate in such a narrow perspective it's a crying shame.We're debating (sometimes agressively, but tahts good imo) the rebirth of a nation, one that would want to be a good partner, a responsible neighbour and a contributing society.A nation that wants to take responsibility and accountability for itself.For me, thats awesome.Terrifying,exciting and draining all at the same time and I cannae wait.
		
Click to expand...

seriously? As we cant get any definitive answers from the instigators lets just say the key things don't matter and it will be all right on the night.

Just a couple of posts previously you were lambasting labour for not having the balls to announce their plans POST (possible) yes.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well fortunately Scots are now in a position to do something about it if they want...

It's not Scotland's fault that the rest of us currently can't.  I find odd the argument that says that because England and Wales can't have or do something then why should Scotland?  Well the thing is - Scotland can - though they prob won't
		
Click to expand...

When did anyone say it's Scotland's fault ? 

Also when did anyone say that because England and Wales can't do something Scotland also can't ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			seriously? As we cant get any definitive answers from the instigators lets just say the key things don't matter and it will be all right on the night.

Just a couple of posts previously you were lambasting labour for not having the balls to announce their plans POST (possible) yes.

Click to expand...

Seriously.And I wasn't lambasting anyone, I was suggesting that not planning for either outcome is a dereliction of duty.

None of it really matters, the earth will continue to spin and Hibs will continue to be abject *****.


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well fortunately Scots are now in a position to do something about it if they want...

It's not Scotland's fault that the rest of us currently can't.  I find odd the argument that says that because England and Wales can't have or do something then why should Scotland?  Well the thing is - Scotland can - though they prob won't
		
Click to expand...

I don't think I'd want to leave a union just because I don't like how the government is run and wealth is distributed.
Let's be brutally honest here, most politicians are in it for themselves no matter what party they show allegiance to. You'd still get shafted by a new Scottish parliament if it comes to pass, it's the way of the world.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The entire debate is being framed in a very narrow corridor.Does it really matter about military or currency?Does anyone seriously think we'll be decimated by yes?We'll have no money or no soldiers?Doe sthe demand for clarity on answers from Salmond by Darling really progress things?Why does the white paper have to be the reference point for everything?The SNP or Labour or Conservative or Green are not that important.

Everything, everything will work itself out as best as possible.Will it be better than rUK?I don't actually care.I'm not competing with rUk to be better than them, just the same.Will be get into the EU?Probably, but so what?Same applies to NATO.Folk are framing this entire debate in such a narrow perspective it's a crying shame.We're debating (sometimes agressively, but tahts good imo) the rebirth of a nation, one that would want to be a good partner, a responsible neighbour and a contributing society.A nation that wants to take responsibility and accountability for itself.For me, thats awesome.Terrifying,exciting and draining all at the same time and I cannae wait.
		
Click to expand...

My inclining might still be to vote NO if I had a vote but I like this framing of what it's all about.  As Darling said just yesterday in an interview I watched on BBC Scotland 2014 - an independent Scotland would be a successful country.  And that is the point.  Maybe not as successful as rUK - maybe more successful.  Maybe Scotland would crash into a major recession - maybe it wouldn't.  If it did then in time it would work it's way out of that recession.  Scotland will become the country it wants to be - under governments it chooses of whatever flavour.


----------



## Slab (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I had a thought on this as it seems to me that whereas a very narrow NO would perhaps be OK (because it implies status quo), a very narrow YES could well be problematic and not very digestible.  In the case of a very narrow YES perhaps it would have been appropriate to seek the view of the Scottish diaspora.  In an 'advisory' way either to confirm the YES or to say 'think again' - and send the vote back to be re-run.
		
Click to expand...

Agree I think there's a serious risk a No vote will imply a backing for the status quo when it could also be a simple vote against the only choice on offer, but that's the risk of a single question referendum  

I see what your saying about a re-run but I fear it would just roll on for decades until political or social changes swing a sufficient majority one way or t'other 

As one of the Scottish diaspora (only gone 30 months & who'll return sooner rather than later) I'd love to be part of the decision but I've had to accept that if I get it then a 70 year old who emigrated from Carnoustie to Canada 65 years ago would also get a say and I don't really want that (whatever the cut off it will always disadvantage someone) 



And as a general comment to save a separate post:

I still see far too many side issues being cited in order to justify a vote for either side. Does anyone really believe that Scotland will descend to third world status in the event of a Yes, or be invaded, or have no currency in our wallets etc etc?

Independence will be a tough road and might even cost a shilling or two more but the choice of self determination has to be separated from the posturing and scaremongering (from both sides) 

In truth we don't actually need definitive answers right now to every possible post yes scenario for defense, currency, health, education etc. This is far bigger than any of these things

I see and read about political & other figures round the world saying don't do it, don't go... but in truth every one of them are looking from the outside & looking out for their own interests and what Scottish independence might mean to their model of the world 

Only the people in Scotland are looking from the inside out (& not even all of them) so its no surprise many on here cant grasp what attraction Independence holds


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 2, 2014)

Beezerk said:



			I don't think I'd want to leave a union just because I don't like how the government is run and wealth is distributed.
Let's be brutally honest here, most politicians are in it for themselves no matter what party they show allegiance to. You'd still get shafted by a new Scottish parliament if it comes to pass, it's the way of the world.
		
Click to expand...

But that's where Tony Benn's Five Questions of Power/Democracy truly apply!

And currently, none of them get answered well for Scots by Westminster!


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 2, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			But that's where Tony Benn's Five Questions of Power/Democracy truly apply!
		
Click to expand...

*opens Google in another web page*


----------



## Slab (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The entire debate is being framed in a very narrow corridor.Does it really matter about military or currency?Does anyone seriously think we'll be decimated by yes?We'll have no money or no soldiers?Doe sthe demand for clarity on answers from Salmond by Darling really progress things?Why does the white paper have to be the reference point for everything?The SNP or Labour or Conservative or Green are not that important.

Everything, everything will work itself out as best as possible.Will it be better than rUK?I don't actually care.I'm not competing with rUk to be better than them, just the same.Will be get into the EU?Probably, but so what?Same applies to NATO.Folk are framing this entire debate in such a narrow perspective it's a crying shame.We're debating (sometimes agressively, but tahts good imo) the rebirth of a nation, one that would want to be a good partner, a responsible neighbour and a contributing society.A nation that wants to take responsibility and accountability for itself.For me, thats awesome.Terrifying,exciting and draining all at the same time and I cannae wait.
		
Click to expand...

Obviously I took too long typing my own version of this which you'll see a few post below yours, but wanted to say I fully agree


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 2, 2014)

Speaking of contingency plans, I just heard on the radio that the UK Treasury have finally admitted to having one post YES.
It was in true Yes Minister 'Mandarin' speak actually, contingency plans to make a contingency plan.
Better hurry folks only two weeks to go.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 2, 2014)

Slab said:



			Agree I think there's a serious risk a No vote will imply a backing for the status quo when it could also be a simple vote against the only choice on offer, but that's the risk of a single question referendum  

I see what your saying about a re-run but I fear it would just roll on for decades until political or social changes swing a sufficient majority one way or t'other 

As one of the Scottish diaspora (only gone 30 months & who'll return sooner rather than later) I'd love to be part of the decision but I've had to accept that if I get it then a 70 year old who emigrated from Carnoustie to Canada 65 years ago would also get a say and I don't really want that (whatever the cut off it will always disadvantage someone) 



And as a general comment to save a separate post:

I still see far too many side issues being cited in order to justify a vote for either side. Does anyone really believe that Scotland will descend to third world status in the event of a Yes, or be invaded, or have no currency in our wallets etc etc?

Independence will be a tough road and might even cost a shilling or two more but the choice of self determination has to be separated from the posturing and scaremongering (from both sides) 

In truth we don't actually need definitive answers right now to every possible post yes scenario for defense, currency, health, education etc. This is far bigger than any of these things

I see and read about political & other figures round the world saying don't do it, don't go... but in truth every one of them are looking from the outside & looking out for their own interests and what Scottish independence might mean to their model of the world 

*Only the people in Scotland are looking from the inside out (& not even all of them) so its no surprise many on here cant grasp what attraction Independence holds*

Click to expand...

Take off your rose tinted glasses a minute and enlighten us? please don't use the YES campaigns words of "wonderful, successful, buoyant, happy, prosperous, thriving etc etc without any detail as they have/are doing.

There are some on here that think an independent Scotland will be like Brigadoon, just perfect and full of happy clappy people who think it will be alright in the long run, they don't know why but they are sure it will be. Unbelievable.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Speaking of contingency plans, I just heard on the radio that the UK Treasury have finally admitted to having one post YES.
It was in true Yes Minister 'Mandarin' speak actually, contingency plans to make a contingency plan.
Better hurry folks only two weeks to go.
		
Click to expand...

Did you seriously think they didnt have one? are you that naive!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 2, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The entire debate is being framed in a very narrow corridor.Does it really matter about military or currency?Does anyone seriously think we'll be decimated by yes?We'll have no money or no soldiers?Doe sthe demand for clarity on answers from Salmond by Darling really progress things?Why does the white paper have to be the reference point for everything?The SNP or Labour or Conservative or Green are not that important.

Everything, everything will work itself out as best as possible.Will it be better than rUK?I don't actually care.I'm not competing with rUk to be better than them, just the same.Will be get into the EU?Probably, but so what?Same applies to NATO.Folk are framing this entire debate in such a narrow perspective it's a crying shame.We're debating (sometimes agressively, but tahts good imo) the rebirth of a nation, one that would want to be a good partner, a responsible neighbour and a contributing society.A nation that wants to take responsibility and accountability for itself.For me, thats awesome.Terrifying,exciting and draining all at the same time and I cannae wait.
		
Click to expand...

Broadly, I think you are right. It should be about the principle of independence, of nationalism versus unity going forward. But, while Scotland could clearly survive quite happily there are some specifics that people are concerned about. It's not unreasonable to want to know what you're getting into in the short term. 

For me, however, on the opposite side to yourself I find the minutia being debated to be largely irrelevant and depressing. Countries breaking up into smaller states are moving in the wrong direction, in my opinion. I'd like to see the whole world ending the twin scourges of nationalism and religion that divide us and coming together for the benefit of all mankind. Lol, I said it - bring on the withering put down.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Did you seriously think they didnt have one? are you that naive!
		
Click to expand...

Haud onnnnnnnnn, THEY said they did not have one.

[Do you infer they were telling fibs]


----------



## Slab (Sep 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Take off your rose tinted glasses a minute and enlighten us? please don't use the YES campaigns words of *"wonderful, successful, buoyant, happy, prosperous, thriving etc etc* without any detail as they have/are doing.

There are some on here that think an independent Scotland will be like Brigadoon, just perfect and full of happy clappy people who think it will be alright in the long run, they don't know why but they are sure it will be. Unbelievable.
		
Click to expand...

I didn't use any of those words & doubt I'll waste any on your facetious reply either 

And they're polarized sunglasses not rose tinted


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 2, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I'd like to see the whole world ending the twin scourges of nationalism and religion that divide us and coming together for the benefit of all mankind. Lol, I said it - bring on the withering put down. 

Click to expand...

Nice thought (Blue Mink's Melting Pot springs to mind), but never going to happen!

Best way to 'conquer' Nationalism imo is to actually accede to their aims and provide the Nations! That, of course causes different issues they are probably less dangerous than Nationalism. Religion - often associated with Nationalism anyway - is, however, a different problem!



Slab said:



			...
And they're polarized sunglasses not rose tinted 

Click to expand...

Not sure that helps you pov! Polarized lenses only allow light aligned 1 way to pass through!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			When did anyone say it's Scotland's fault ? 

Also when did anyone say that because England and Wales can't do something Scotland also can't ?
		
Click to expand...

I often read here the point that many of the issues supporters of YES Scotland state as reasons for independence are the same issues that many in England and Wales have.  The conclusion being that these are not good reasons for voting YES.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I often read here the point that many of the issues supporters of YES Scotland state as reasons for independence are the same issues that many in England and Wales have.  The conclusion being that these are not good reasons for voting YES.
		
Click to expand...

That hasn't really answered both the questions and you have made your own conclusions of other people's posts. 

But I'm going to guess - the answer to both is "no one"


----------



## CMAC (Sep 2, 2014)

Slab said:



*I didn't use any of those words* & doubt I'll waste any on your facetious reply either 

And they're polarized sunglasses not rose tinted 

Click to expand...

I know you didnt, maybe read the post again but properly. 

However, I'm actually not interested in your reply, I could write it for you as you're clearly in the "it'll be alright on the night" camp.

What a great method to decide how to use your vote.


----------



## Slab (Sep 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I know you didnt, maybe read the post again but properly. 

However, I'm actually not interested in your reply, I could write it for you as you're clearly in the "it'll be alright on the night" camp.

What a great method to decide how to use your vote.
		
Click to expand...

_CMAC "....please don't use the YES campaigns words of "wonderful, successful, buoyant, happy, prosperous, thriving etc etc without any detail"_

Your quite right of course, you actually asked me not to do something I wasn't doing anyway! As I said, facetious post


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			What a great method to decide how to use your vote.
		
Click to expand...

There are infinite methods as to how you decide to vote, none of them wrong.

Folk hate English, vote yes
Folk love Doctor Who, vote no
Folk support Rangers, vote no
Folk fancy Nicola Sturgeon, vote yes
Folk fancy John Barrowman, vote no
Folk love Tennents lager, vote yes

etc

You may disagree with some of them, but that's not the point.If that person thinks that's his decider, then crack on.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I know you didnt, maybe read the post again but properly. 

However, I'm actually not interested in your reply, I could write it for you as you're clearly in the "it'll be alright on the night" camp.

What a great method to decide how to use your vote.
		
Click to expand...

You are being a bit selective there Mac.
The whole of the UK voted in New Labour under the slogan........Things can only get better.
There has to be a leap of faith anywhere a new government is formed, Scotland is no different.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You are being a bit selective there Mac.
The whole of the UK voted in New Labour under the slogan........Things can only get better.
There has to be a leap of faith anywhere a new government is formed, Scotland is no different.
		
Click to expand...

And now you're being a bit selective. This isn't a general election, we can't change our minds in five years. This is a one way trip into the unknown so while your analogy isn't entirely spurious neither is it a true comparison.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 2, 2014)

If I were living in the rUK I would be very anxious to see the Governments contingency plans, post YES. Why are they keeping their residents in the dark?

An Independent Scotland would have a considerable effect on rUK but their leaders both North and South of the Border seem to have no plans whatsoever. At the same time the are trying to nail the SNP to the floor over their plans. Plans which are out in the open and everyone can see.

Perhaps we can have some replies to my first sentence from rUK posters instead of the constant sniping of the SNP.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

I'm pretty sure they have plans in place - why do they need to tell us 

If there is a yes vote then they can let us know the plans


----------



## CMAC (Sep 2, 2014)

Slab said:



_CMAC "....please don't use the YES campaigns words of "wonderful, successful, buoyant, happy, prosperous, thriving etc etc without any detail"_

Your quite right of course, you actually asked me not to do something I wasn't doing anyway! As I said, facetious post
		
Click to expand...

selective quoting to change the meaning!! very clever.

If you used the whole quote you will clearly see (once myopic shades removed) that I asked you to "enlighten us" _without_ using these words that the yes campaign use.

Please dont deliberately misquote me again to try and score cheap points.


----------



## Val (Sep 2, 2014)

If their is a YES vote people need to embrace it, all the parties and all the people and make it work, it has to work as their is no turning back.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If I were living in the rUK I would be very anxious to see the Governments contingency plans, post YES. Why are they keeping their residents in the dark?
		
Click to expand...

Because we have absolutely no say in the matter, as Adi points out, so us knowing plans for what may or may not happen is pointless. I also imagine, should there be a Yes or a No, how the UK/rUK copes will form a big part of the general election, so why reveal both hands early, when only one will be required.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			That hasn't really answered both the questions and you have made your own conclusions of other people's posts. 

But I'm going to guess - the answer to both is "no one"
		
Click to expand...

OK - so I am mistaken.  You are telling me that at no point has anyone mentioned that, let's say, the North East of England feels the same about their representation at Westminster; that nobody has suggested that folks in the North West feel the same about a government run by 'Eton Boys' with little understanding of the real issues facing the NW.  That nobody has complained that HS2 will do nothing for Newcastle or Liverpool; that billions spent on London Crossrail does nothing for the North of England or Wales when a proper trans-pennine rail link would have huge economic benefits; that the Tories only care about marginal seats Birmingham south.  That there are many voters in England and Wales just as concerned as Scots voters about privatisation of the NHS and such as the Bedroom tax.

If nobody has mentioned any of the above as issues that many in England and Wales also have and that Scots shouldn't feel that somehow they particularly feel these issues - then I am mistaken.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			OK - so I am mistaken.  You are telling me that at no point has anyone mentioned that, let's say, the North East of England feels the same about their representation at Westminster; that nobody has suggested that folks in the North West feel the same about a government run by 'Eton Boys' with little understanding of the real issues facing the NW.  That nobody has complained that HS2 will do nothing for Newcastle or Liverpool; that billions spent on London Crossrail does nothing for the North of England or Wales when a proper trans-pennine rail link would have huge economic benefits; that the Tories only care about marginal seats Birmingham south.  That there are many voters in England and Wales just as concerned as Scots voters about privatisation of the NHS and such as the Bedroom tax.

If nobody has mentioned any of the above as issues that many in England and Wales also have and that Scots shouldn't feel that somehow they particularly feel these issues - then I am mistaken.
		
Click to expand...


Ok so I'm saying any of that where do people say 

"it's Scotland's Fault"

And "because England and Wales can't do anything Scotland can't" 

Which was both the questions I asked 

People being concerned about the same issues doesn't mean that they are saying Scotland can't have their choice ?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Valentino said:



			If their is a YES vote people need to embrace it, all the parties and all the people and make it work, it has to work as their is no turning back.
		
Click to expand...

I think that after a NO vote many Scots will find life after rejecting independence rather 'odd'.  So much of the Scottish character and of the cultural landscape of Scotland is built around the differences Scots perceive between themselves and those of the rest of UK, and the accumulation of a century or so of celebrating the differences and looking forward to the day when Scotland will be 'a nation again'.  Well a start, and at a relatively trivial level. you might as well dump singing Flower of Scotland; Scots Wa Hae etc - as all will be obsolete.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Ok so I'm saying any of that where do people say 

"it's Scotland's Fault"

And "because England and Wales can't do anything Scotland can't" 

Which was both the questions I asked 

People being concerned about the same issues doesn't mean that they are saying Scotland can't have their choice ?
		
Click to expand...

What I said about "it's Scotland's Fault" is that it's *not *Scotland's fault that other areas of the UK don't have self-determination as an option.  Scotland is fortunate to be in the position that it has a choice - fortnight on Thursday.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I think that after a NO vote many Scots will find life after rejecting independence rather 'odd'.  So much of the Scottish character and of the cultural landscape of Scotland is built around the differences Scots perceive between themselves and those of the rest of UK, and the accumulation of a century or so of celebrating the differences and looking forward to the day when Scotland will be 'a nation again'.  Well a start, and at a relatively trivial level. you might as well dump singing Flower of Scotland; Scots Wa Hae etc - as all will be obsolete.
		
Click to expand...

I expect that after a NO vote that things will just carry on as we do now - working together


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			And now you're being a bit selective. This isn't a general election, we can't change our minds in five years. This is a one way trip into the unknown so while your analogy isn't entirely spurious neither is it a true comparison.
		
Click to expand...

...with the flip side being.

Scotland won't get this choice again for a generation - or more - and maybe with a bit of work by Westminster never again according to the Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael.  

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...le-scotlands-future-once-and-for-all.24865471

So vote NO and you are lashing yourself to the UK whatever that might bring for as long as a piece of string - and what that will look like ten years down the line is likewise completely unknown


----------



## CMAC (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I expect that after a NO vote that things will just carry on as we do now - working together
		
Click to expand...

agreed!

Possibly the main party will double their efforts and campaign and maybe, just maybe Devo Max might come back on the table for the near future especially if the vote is as close as the polls say it will be- surely the Govt has to listen to that and respond accordingly.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I expect that after a NO vote that things will just carry on as we do now - working together
		
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about relationships between Scotland and England - and on that I agree with you.

I'm talking about the perception Scots will hold of themselves and of what it means to be Scottish.  Non-Scots in Scotland will just get on with life.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'm not talking about relationships between Scotland and England - and on that I agree with you.

I'm talking about the perception Scots will hold of themselves and of what it means to be Scottish.  Non-Scots in Scotland will just get on with life.
		
Click to expand...

I expect the Scottish will feel how they do right now - Scottish and all the good that embraces 

The Scottish nationality and history won't change - no reason for it to


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

CMAC said:



			agreed!

Possibly the main party will double their efforts and campaign and maybe, just maybe Devo Max might come back on the table for the near future especially if the vote is as close as the polls say it will be- surely the Govt has to listen to that and respond accordingly.
		
Click to expand...

Why should they listen to Scotland over calls for Devo Max and for fulfilment of promises made.  Westminster and the Tories have a much larger and more important constituency than Scotland that they have to placate and respond to.  And if that constituency does not want further powers devolved, or if it wants such as a cut in the Barnett formula, then Westminster will be as likely to listen to that voice as the Scottish one.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Why should they listen to Scotland over calls for Devo Max and for fulfilment of promises made.  Westminster and the Tories have a much larger and more important constituency than Scotland that they have to placate and respond to.  And if that constituency does not want further powers devolved, or if it wants such as a cut in the Barnett formula, then Westminster will be as likely to listen to that voice as the Scottish one.
		
Click to expand...

I would hope that after any vote or election that the Tories or any party would look after the interests of the whole country that they govern and if that includes Scotland then I hope their needs are looked after also


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...with the flip side being.

Scotland won't get this choice again for a generation - or more - and maybe with a bit of work by Westminster never again according to the Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael.  

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...le-scotlands-future-once-and-for-all.24865471

So vote NO and you are lashing yourself to the UK whatever that might bring for as long as a piece of string - and what that will look like ten years down the line is likewise completely unknown
		
Click to expand...

Er. Just where in the article did he say that? Or anything like the 'quote' in the headline?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I expect the Scottish will feel how they do right now
		
Click to expand...

Not so sure.  By saying you 'expect' them to feel the same you clearly have some insight into how Scots feel about their being Scottish and what that means?  But you may be right - maybe Scots won't feel any different about themselves.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Er. Just where in the article did he say that? Or anything like the 'quote' in the headline?
		
Click to expand...

SCOTTISH Secretary Alistair Carmichael has said maintaining a strong UK Government presence north of the Border in the event of a No vote in September would mean the independence question would never be put again and the issue of Scotland's future would be settled "once and for all".


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...with the flip side being.

Scotland won't get this choice again for a generation - or more - and maybe with a bit of work by Westminster never again according to the Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael.  

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...le-scotlands-future-once-and-for-all.24865471

So vote NO and you are lashing yourself to the UK whatever that might bring for as long as a piece of string - and what that will look like ten years down the line is likewise completely unknown
		
Click to expand...

Except change within the UK will be a gradual evolution whereas independent Scotland is and all or nothing big bang. So, again, not comparing like with like.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not so sure.  By saying you 'expect' them to feel the same you clearly have some insight into how Scots feel about their being Scottish and what that means?  But you may be right - maybe Scots won't feel any different about themselves.
		
Click to expand...

Why would they suddenly start to feel different about being Scottish ? Or feel differently ? 

How a country is governed should never change how anyone feels about themselves or their nationality


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Except change within the UK will be a gradual evolution whereas independent Scotland is and all or nothing big bang. So, again, not comparing like with like.
		
Click to expand...

So a vote in 2016 to leave the EU won't be 'big bang'?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



*Why should they listen to Scotland over calls for Devo Max *and for fulfilment of promises made.  Westminster and the Tories have a much larger and more important constituency than Scotland that they have to placate and respond to.  And if that constituency does not want further powers devolved, or if it wants such as a cut in the Barnett formula, then Westminster will be as likely to listen to that voice as the Scottish one.
		
Click to expand...

If the polls are correct and its as close as they say 47%-53% with 80% turnout then it might make them sit up and listen, at the very least have dialogue again.

If its a NO landslide you can forget anything decent being put back on the agenda.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So a vote in 2016 to leave the EU won't be 'big bang'?
		
Click to expand...

Jeez. Not to the same extent and purely hypothetical anyway at this point. Let it go man, let it go.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why would they suddenly start to feel different about being Scottish ? Or feel differently ? 

How a country is governed should never change how anyone feels about themselves or their nationality
		
Click to expand...

Well it might if much of your national identity is built up around the loss or want of something, that when given the chance to grab hold of you reject - possibly for ever.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well it might if much of your national identity is built up around the loss or want of something, that when given the chance to grab hold of you reject - possibly for ever.
		
Click to expand...


Your national identity is built upon your ancestry and history not the result of a vote 

Of anyone's national Identity is built upon the forthcoming referendum then would suggest they don't feel very strongly about their country 

When a a yes or no vote happens - the people will still be Scottish that won't change


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 2, 2014)

Funny how most of the 373 pages from the Yes side (and the I want to be on the yes side but I want my cake and eat it and live in England side) is all based around the fact that those nasty Tory boys are in power.  Well their in power because of the democratic way we select the dumb rulers of a country.

You seemed more than happy when it was Labour in power.


----------



## DCB (Sep 2, 2014)

There was me thinking it was a coalition government, just think what it would have been like if big Gordon hadn't thrown wee Nick out of no10 when Gordon was trying to save his backside after the last election.


----------



## DCB (Sep 2, 2014)

Interesting the huge numbers of people who are suddenly coming out of the woodwork to register to vote. Hope all the appropriate authorities will be checking the newly udated electoral roll for any interesting information that will suddenly be available. I certainly know people who used to be able to "hide" as they weren't registered to vote


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 2, 2014)

When this thread started I was one of several posters who commented that we didn't know anyone, or only a handful of people, who were voting "yes". I know that, at that time, I considered the prospect of a "yes" vote to be remote.

I admit that things have changed. I know a fair few "yes" voters now, as well as a fair few "nos". And yet, most of my friends, family and colleagues I don't know how they plan to vote.

The "yes" supporters are far more visible than the "nos". Signs in windows, in cars, badges etc and are much more vocal in speaking up and arguing their case (often talking total pish but passionately so). 

"No" supporters are far more circumspect, almost embarrassed to be voting "against Scotland" or against the populist, utopian (head-in-the-sand?) independence campaign.

The upshot is that I'm no longer certain we'll get a "no" vote. I think there is a real chance it'll be "yes". I hope that the majority of my contacts whose views I don't know are either undecided or "slightly embarassed nos" but that is only a guess....


----------



## DCB (Sep 2, 2014)

FD put a No poster in your parked car and you may well find some extra ventilation there she you return to it.


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 2, 2014)

DCB said:



			FD put a No poster in your parked car and you may well find some extra ventilation there she you return to it.
		
Click to expand...

I once left a signed picture of Tony Blair in the back of my car.  When I returned the window was smashed and there were two pictures on the seat!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 2, 2014)

DCB said:



			FD put a No poster in your parked car and you may well find some extra ventilation there she you return to it.
		
Click to expand...

True, there is also a certain fear factor of reprisals from some of the less well-evolved "yes" supporters. That probably cuts both ways, however.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 2, 2014)

DCB said:



			There was me thinking it was a coalition government, just think what it would have been like if big Gordon hadn't thrown wee Nick out of no10 when Gordon was trying to save his backside after the last election.
		
Click to expand...

It is but it appears on here to be all about the Tory's and the English. Some posters seem to forget the vote will effect the whole of the UK.

Its getting to sound a bit like, "we can't have our own way so were taking our ball away".

By the way SLH, the NE did have the chance to vote for a unitary local authority and I believe they rejected the idea..


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 2, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			...
You seemed more than happy when it was Labour in power.
		
Click to expand...

Quite possibly because that's much more in line with (if not the same as) the way the Scots feel!

Has no bearing on whether they believe they should be  independent or not though!


----------



## Dodger (Sep 2, 2014)

I have not read this thread for a while but just wanted to say Adi's posts are a joy to read.:thup:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 2, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			When this thread started I was one of several posters who commented that we didn't know anyone, or only a handful of people, who were voting "yes". I know that, at that time, I considered the prospect of a "yes" vote to be remote.

I admit that things have changed. I know a fair few "yes" voters now, as well as a fair few "nos". And yet, most of my friends, family and colleagues I don't know how they plan to vote.

The "yes" supporters are far more visible than the "nos". Signs in windows, in cars, badges etc and are much more vocal in speaking up and arguing their case (often talking total pish but passionately so). 

"No" supporters are far more circumspect, almost embarrassed to be voting "against Scotland" or against the populist, utopian (head-in-the-sand?) independence campaign.

The upshot is that I'm no longer certain we'll get a "no" vote. I think there is a real chance it'll be "yes". I hope that the majority of my contacts whose views I don't know are either undecided or "slightly embarassed nos" but that is only a guess....
		
Click to expand...

I made my mind up last week to vote YES.
I went to a Jim Sillars Yes Meeting in my local town hall tonight and he convinced me I have made the right choice.
Clever man and a wonderful speaker.

The hall was packed with supporters of all shapes, sizes and ages. We even had a local 'Braveheart' who had been a member of the SNP for 60 years. He gave a very loud and passionate shout with no context whatsoever, but was good fun to watch! 

Sillars [naturally] thinks Yes will win with a much bigger vote than people would have imagined.
He said that the No's as well as the Don't knows were changing to Yes in large numbers.
He also thinks that England are in for some really tough times financially and politically and Scotland will be well off out of it.

Also found out about the UK governments plans for compulsory conscription [see other thread]


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I made my mind up last week to vote YES.
I went to a Jim Sillars Yes Meeting in my local town hall tonight and he convinced me I have made the right choice.
Clever man and a wonderful speaker.

The hall was packed with supporters of all shapes, sizes and ages. We even had a local 'Braveheart' who had been a member of the SNP for 60 years. He gave a very loud and passionate shout with no context whatsoever, but was good fun to watch! 

Sillars [naturally] thinks Yes will win with a much bigger vote than people would have imagined.
He said that the No's as well as the Don't knows were changing to Yes in large numbers.
He also thinks that England are in for some really tough times financially and politically and Scotland will be well off out of it.

*Also found out about the UK governments plans for compulsory conscription* [see other thread]
		
Click to expand...

It appears he didn't do his research very well

Interesting how he know how people will vote - is this because of those polls again which are not to believed ( mainly when it shows the No is winning )


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Also found out about the UK governments plans for compulsory conscription [see other thread]
		
Click to expand...

Wow, and the No campaign are getting slated for scaremongering!
What worries me is some will actually believe this codswallop.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



*I made my mind up last week to vote YES.*
I went to a Jim Sillars Yes Meeting in my local town hall tonight and he convinced me I have made the right choice.
Clever man and a wonderful speaker.

The hall was packed with supporters of all shapes, sizes and ages. We even had a local 'Braveheart' who had been a member of the SNP for 60 years. He gave a very loud and passionate shout with no context whatsoever, but was good fun to watch! 

Sillars [naturally] thinks Yes will win with a much bigger vote than people would have imagined.
He said that the No's as well as the Don't knows were changing to Yes in large numbers.
He also thinks that England are in for some really tough times financially and politically and Scotland will be well off out of it.

*Also found out about the UK governments plans for compulsory conscription* [see other thread]
		
Click to expand...

you were a yes man a long before that.


As for that utter drivel about conscription, was that from Jim Sillars yes meeting as well? thought so, unbelievable


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It appears he didn't do his research very well

Interesting how he know how people will vote - is this because of those polls again which are not to believed ( mainly when it shows the No is winning )
		
Click to expand...

[1] It was not from him Phil, he poo poo the idea.
Came from a couple of guys from the floor. Who were right/but wrong.

[2] He is a very seasoned politician, not normally given to making rash statements.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			[1] It was not from him Phil, he poo poo the idea.
Came from a couple of guys from the floor. Who were right/but wrong.

[2] He is a very seasoned politician, not normally given to making rash statements.
		
Click to expand...

Well it appears he is making a lot right now - any proof to back his suggestion about England ( why just England I'm not sure ) will suffer financially but Scotland will flourish ?!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 2, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Well it appears he is making a lot right now - any proof to back his suggestion about England ( why just England I'm not sure ) will suffer financially but Scotland will flourish ?!
		
Click to expand...

Where did I say Scotland will flourish?

England have a large negative balance of payments, that and payback of the debt caused by the banking crash need to be addressed.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 2, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Where did I say Scotland will flourish?

England have a large negative balance of payments, that and payback of the debt caused by the banking crash need to be addressed.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry misread your post 

And why is it just England with a negative balance ? Is it not the UK ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Sorry misread your post 

And why is it just England with a negative balance ? Is it not the UK ?
		
Click to expand...

For many years Scotland has had a positive balance of payments, we export far more than we import.
A large percentage of our imports are from England


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Also found out about the UK governments plans for compulsory conscription [see other thread]
		
Click to expand...

If the yes voters have been taken in by that there's no hope. If that kind of message has been believed how gullible are you and how many other "facts" have you been taken in by.

Once again you go on about England when you know full well any decision is going to effect the whole of the UK.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

DCB said:



			FD put a No poster in your parked car and you may well find some extra ventilation there she you return to it.
		
Click to expand...

jokes.


----------



## Val (Sep 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			For many years Scotland has had a positive balance of payments, we export far more than we import.
A large percentage of our imports are from England
		
Click to expand...

So why did/is our economy grow/growing at a slower rate than that of the UK?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-27048036

If you are going to post nonsense as fact at least back it up with something.


----------



## Val (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			jokes.
		
Click to expand...

Not at all, I witnessed an egged window with a NO poster up.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 3, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So why did/is our economy grow/growing at a slower rate than that of the UK?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-27048036

If you are going to post nonsense as fact at least back it up with something.
		
Click to expand...

Judging by his conscription post - just made up garbage.


----------



## Val (Sep 3, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Judging by his conscription post - just made up garbage.
		
Click to expand...

As usual, and chances are no response either which has been common theme when his inaccuracies have been pointed out all over this thread.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Not at all, I witnessed an egged window with a NO poster up.
		
Click to expand...

This egging is getting out of hand.

But seriously, when all the no camp have to be concerned by is a few eggs, in this febrile atmosphere I'm absolutely loving, then the yes camp are doing pretty well.Good to see we're only resorting to eggs and name calling instead of fire bombs,breaking bones and kicking women.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So why did/is our economy grow/growing at a slower rate than that of the UK?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-27048036

If you are going to post nonsense as fact at least back it up with something.
		
Click to expand...

This is a guess, but maybe because the economic choices being made down south are to help that region?_Maybe_ if the economic choices laid fully with Holyrood we could redirect our economy to one that suits our needs?I suppose that argument could be made for parts of England/Wales outside the M25 corridor, and that is also correct, but unfortunately they're not having a referendum to remove themselves from that particular train.


----------



## Val (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This egging is getting out of hand.

But seriously, when all the no camp have to be concerned by is a few eggs, in this febrile atmosphere I'm absolutely loving, then the yes camp are doing pretty well.Good to see we're only resorting to eggs and name calling instead of fire bombs,breaking bones and kicking women.
		
Click to expand...

You called DCB's post a joke I merely commented it's not. If you are thinking what you posted is only happening on the YES side you are seriously mistaken.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			For many years Scotland has had a positive balance of payments, we export far more than we import.
A large percentage of our imports are from England
		
Click to expand...

Can you show me what facts you use to gain that conclusion


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You called DCB's post a joke I merely commented it's not. If you are thinking what you posted is only happening on the YES side you are seriously mistaken.
		
Click to expand...

I could have my blinkers on, but I'm not sure there's been many assaults reported by yes on no?Like the mass beating of_ jambos for yes_ at tynie at the weekend...I'd appreciate links if you can provide?

Btw, I'm not doubting there are vocal idiots campaigning for yes, I've been accused quite a few times of being one myself!


----------



## Val (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is a guess, but maybe because the economic choices being made down south are to help that region?_Maybe_ if the economic choices laid fully with Holyrood we could redirect our economy to one that suits our needs?I suppose that argument could be made for parts of England/Wales outside the M25 corridor, and that is also correct, but unfortunately they're not having a referendum to remove themselves from that particular train.
		
Click to expand...

So your thought is a guess, at least we get that part correct.

I'll give you my guess, is it maybe more the fact that Scotland's economic growth is down to the fact that there is not enough revenue generated in Scotland to sustain a similar level of growth to that of the UK?


----------



## Val (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



*I could have my blinkers on*, but I'm not sure there's been many assaults reported by yes on no?Like the mass beating of_ jambos for yes_ at tynie at the weekend...I'd appreciate links if you can provide?

Btw, I'm not doubting there are vocal idiots campaigning for yes, I've been accused quite a few times of being one myself!
		
Click to expand...

As we all could I suppose, all im saying there are many reported and not reported incidents on both sides.


----------



## Val (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Can you show me what facts you use to gain that conclusion
		
Click to expand...

He can't, ive already posted info saying he's wrong and he wont issue a retort, he never does.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I could have my blinkers on, but I'm not sure there's been many assaults reported by yes on no?Like the mass beating of_ jambos for yes_ at tynie at the weekend...I'd appreciate links if you can provide?

Btw, I'm not doubting there are vocal idiots campaigning for yes, I've been accused quite a few times of being one myself!
		
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to this mass beating in the media ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So your thought is a guess, at least we get that part correct.

I'll give you my guess, is it maybe more the fact that Scotland's economic growth is down to the fact that there is not enough revenue generated in Scotland to sustain a similar level of growth to that of the UK?
		
Click to expand...

Everything is a guess, no one on either side is Nostrodamus.You're opinion is fair enough, but neither of us know for sure, just like Osbourne or Swinney can't know for sure, and certainly not Darling/Brown.But I'm prepared to put my faith in Scotland and it's people, I think ( and I know this is a cliche used ad naseum by YES) that the best placed people to run the concerns of Scotland is the people who live and work here.How anyone can think otherwise is something I'll never be able to comprehend.



Valentino said:



			As we all could I suppose, all im saying there are many reported and not reported incidents on both sides.
		
Click to expand...

I've not seen any reported physical attacks by yes campaigners


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Do you have a link to this mass beating in the media ?
		
Click to expand...


http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.c...-attacked-by-mob-outside-tynecastle-1-3527125


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.c...-attacked-by-mob-outside-tynecastle-1-3527125

Click to expand...

George Foulkes, former chairman of Hearts and a firm supporter of the No campaign, stressed that there was no evidence the attack had been carried out or orchestrated by No campaigners.

He said: â€œI deplore any physical violence but I think you have to be very careful about making claims about who is responsible.

â€œI would deplore it. But I suspect it may be being exaggerated and twisted to create counter balance to the attacks Jim Murphy has had to suffer.â€


I also understand one No campaigner has suffered abuse a long the likes of being called a terrorist and a peadophile


----------



## CMAC (Sep 3, 2014)

I watched the live debate last night from Edinburgh. 

Much better than the first two, both sides spoke well, no shouting over each other even from Sturgeon, well chaired and some very good points made and information devolved that couldn't, or wouldn't be answered by the first two leaders.

I have to say though that the 'star' of the show for presentation was Ruth Davidson who was quite exceptional and eloquent. She should be in place of Darling.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			George Foulkes, former chairman of Hearts and a firm supporter of the No campaign, stressed that there was no evidence the attack had been carried out or orchestrated by No campaigners.

He said: â€œI deplore any physical violence but I think you have to be very careful about making claims about who is responsible.

â€œI would deplore it. But I suspect it may be being exaggerated and twisted to create counter balance to the attacks Jim Murphy has had to suffer.â€


I also understand one No campaigner has suffered abuse a long the likes of being called a terrorist and a peadophile
		
Click to expand...

This is exhibit 'A' as to why I can't treat you seriously.

You ask for evidence, I give it.It's pretty irrefutable, except for the words of George Foulkes, who anyone with any knowledge of Scotland, let alone the independence debate, knows is a complete fool.He's got a long history of being an idiot, an opinion shared by most jambos I know.

But to compound your own stupidity, you then compare physical attacks on a group to that of shouting names and throwing eggs.Seriously, get some perspective.


----------



## Val (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is exhibit 'A' as to why I can't treat you seriously.

You ask for evidence, I give it.It's pretty irrefutable, except for the words of George Foulkes, who anyone with any knowledge of Scotland, let alone the independence debate, knows is a complete fool.*He's got a long history of being an idiot, an opinion shared by most jambos I know.*

But to compound your own stupidity, you then compare physical attacks on a group to that of shouting names and throwing eggs.Seriously, get some perspective.
		
Click to expand...

A bit like Jim Sillars and that well known Jambo Alex Salmond


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I watched the live debate last night from Edinburgh. 

Much better than the first two, both sides spoke well, no shouting over each other even from Sturgeon, well chaired and some very good points made and information devolved that couldn't, or wouldn't be answered by the first two leaders.

I have to say though that the 'star' of the show for presentation was Ruth Davidson who was quite exceptional and eloquent. She should be in place of Darling.
		
Click to expand...

David Torrance has been advocating Alexander/Davidson for months.

She did make me laugh with her Ukraine comparison but that apart, and her near teary final speech, I liked her.

Was much better, much more balanced ( except the plant from the no camp-the guy who was 'undecided' and talked about local govt...there's pics of him with labour for no banners on twitter) 

A sign that Scotland can debate when the correct environment is given.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

Valentino said:



			A bit like Jim Sillars and that well known Jambo Alex Salmond 

Click to expand...

No way am I having that. Foulkes is in a different league of dafties to Salmond, and Jim Sillars is magnificent.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is exhibit 'A' as to why I can't treat you seriously.

You ask for evidence, I give it.It's pretty irrefutable, except for the words of George Foulkes, who anyone with any knowledge of Scotland, let alone the independence debate, knows is a complete fool.He's got a long history of being an idiot, an opinion shared by most jambos I know.

But to compound your own stupidity, you then compare physical attacks on a group to that of shouting names and throwing eggs.Seriously, get some perspective.
		
Click to expand...

1. I asked for a link to the media coverage - never mentioned evidence 

2. Is there any proof that it was a co ordinated attack by the No campaign ? Appears not - read the Huffington Post coverage and they mention the same thing - no evidence to proof a co ordinated attack and more than likely an argument that escalated after both sets having very strong opposite views 

3. I never mentioned eggs - but verbal abuse can and most times is as harmful as physical abuse - a punch on the nose or being labelled a peadophile ? One could be very damaging to someone's whole life. 

But the worst thing - it's got that nasty. - it's got to the stage that people have little respect for other people's views

Seen it on social media with the Yes people most certainly shouting down the No people 

Common phrase - if you vote no then you are a traitor to Scotland - how pathetic is that


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			1. I asked for a link to the media coverage - never mentioned evidence 

2. Is there any proof that it was a co ordinated attack by the No campaign ? Appears not - read the Huffington Post coverage and they mention the same thing - no evidence to proof a co ordinated attack and more than likely an argument that escalated after both sets having very strong opposite views 

3. I never mentioned eggs - but verbal abuse can and most times is as harmful as physical abuse - a punch on the nose or being labelled a peadophile ? One could be very damaging to someone's whole life. 

But the worst thing - it's got that nasty. - it's got to the stage that people have little respect for other people's views

Seen it on social media with the Yes people most certainly shouting down the No people 

Common phrase - if you vote no then you are a traitor to Scotland - *how pathetic is that*

Click to expand...

Not nearly as pathetic as refusing to acknowledge that folk signing rule britannia then beating yes campaigners were unionists.Actually, that's not pathetic, just seriously stupid.

Anyway, you win.I can't take anymore of you so you're on ignore.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			No way am I having that. Foulkes is in a different league of dafties to Salmond, and Jim Sillars is magnificent.
		
Click to expand...

..and I am so missing Margo from this debate


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Not nearly as pathetic as refusing to acknowledge that *folk signing rule britannia then beating yes campaigners were unionists*.Actually, that's not pathetic, just seriously stupid.

Anyway, you win.I can't take anymore of you so you're on ignore.
		
Click to expand...

It's all pathetic it really is - beyond pathetic 

It appears this vote is ripping a country apart - for a vote that is supposed to all about the good of the country it appears to be the total opposite.

The negative feeling that has grown between both parties is going to ruin Scotland

Oh and the article didn't say that people were signing Rule Britannia then beating Yes campaigners 

*They said it followed several earlier incidents in which they had been verbally abused by a gang bearing the Union Flag and singing Rule, Britannia!*


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			..and I am so missing Margo from this debate 

Click to expand...

Aye, me too.And if Sillars was OK by Margo, he's OK by me.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It's all pathetic it really is - beyond pathetic 

It appears this vote is ripping a country apart - for a vote that is supposed to all about the good of the country it appears to be the total opposite.

The negative feeling that has grown between both parties is going to ruin Scotland

Oh and the article didn't say that people were signing Rule Britannia then beating Yes campaigners 

*They said it followed several earlier incidents in which they had been verbally abused by a gang bearing the Union Flag and singing Rule, Britannia!*

Click to expand...

It's not ripping anything apart. Scotland is just fine and will remain so no matter the outcome of the vote.

Don't mistake the media reporting of a few loonies from any/either side as indicative of something bigger - it's not.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 3, 2014)

ger147 said:



			It's not ripping anything apart. Scotland is just fine and will remain so no matter the outcome of the vote.

Don't mistake the media reporting of a few loonies from any/either side as indicative of something bigger - it's not.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely -we in Scotland are used to the antics of idiots on either side of a 'divide' - usually much more noise than effect.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

ger147 said:



			It's not ripping anything apart. Scotland is just fine and will remain so no matter the outcome of the vote.

Don't mistake the media reporting of a few loonies from any/either side as indicative of something bigger - it's not.
		
Click to expand...

I really hope so 

Just don't want to see this damage a cracking country and also damage a wonderful relationship between all the countries in the UK


----------



## Val (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Aye, me too.And if Sillars was OK by Margo, he's OK by me.
		
Click to expand...

My comment about Sillars was very tongue in cheek, he's a good egg in my book, very bright despite some ramblings from time to time.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Aye, me too.And if Sillars was OK by Margo, he's OK by me.
		
Click to expand...

I really liked Margo (my avatar after all) and she would have been brilliant in this debate.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I really hope so 

Just don't want to see this damage a cracking country and also damage a wonderful relationship between all the countries in the UK
		
Click to expand...

This month's Yes/No clipboard on Buchanan St will be next month's "who is your electricity supplier" clipboard, there will be at least one kilted bagpipe busker and the Scots will continue to support anyone playing against England at football. &#9786;


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

ger147 said:



			This month's Yes/No clipboard on Buchanan St will be next month's "who is your electricity supplier" clipboard, there will be at least one kilted bagpipe busker and the Scots will continue to support anyone playing against England at football. &#9786;
		
Click to expand...



Good to hear 

I do worry for someone people if there is a NO vote though ( which still appears to be what will happen )


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I really liked Margo (my avatar after all) and she would have been brilliant in this debate.
		
Click to expand...

All ifs and ands, but if Margo MacDonald was still alive I genuinely believe YES would be in the 60% area by now.Woman would have flocked to her.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:





Good to hear 

I do worry for someone people if there is a NO vote though ( which still appears to be what will happen )
		
Click to expand...

47-53 now avg of the polls, both sides will be very unsatisfied if by anychance it gets even closer. Yes I know either side will have 'won' even if its by 1 vote but I reckon you know what I mean.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			All ifs and ands, but if Margo MacDonald was still alive I genuinely believe YES would be in the 60% area by now.Woman would have flocked to her.
		
Click to expand...

Not dissing Margo, but that's a pretty patronising view. Maybe women would just continue to make our minds up based on our perception of the issues?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Not dissing Margo, but that's a pretty patronising view. Maybe women would just continue to make our minds up based on our perception of the issues?
		
Click to expand...

Maybe is patronising, and not my intention.She was very popular with woman voters, hence my gut feeling she'd be more capable than, say, Sturgeon who's less popular, in bringing no/undecideds to yes.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 3, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Absolutely -we in Scotland are used to the antics of idiots on either side of a 'divide' - usually much more noise than effect.
		
Click to expand...

You've moved then.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

New Blow for iScotland as yet more oil is found to be accessable

http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news...ntapped-oil-and-gas-reserves-worth-trillions/


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			New Blow for iScotland as yet more oil is found to be accessable

http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news...ntapped-oil-and-gas-reserves-worth-trillions/

Click to expand...

Truly hope their right however it is in their business to talk up gas and oil. Any actual published findings though?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Maybe is patronising, and not my intention.She was very popular with woman voters, hence my gut feeling she'd be more capable than, say, Sturgeon who's less popular, in bringing no/undecideds to yes.
		
Click to expand...

Understand what you're trying to say..... just hate sweeping generalisations like this.

I'd say Margo was more popular with both genders than Sturgeon? So yes maybe she would have brought more women to your side but more men too....

Anyway.... we've got much bigger matters to argue about than this!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 3, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			..and I am so missing Margo from this debate 

Click to expand...

She was with Jim Sillars last night in the form of a picture on his lapel....nice thought.

He quoted her a few times
She is supposted to have called Darling  The Abominable Noman.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

An interesting comparison with NI

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/08/would-anyone-care-if-northern-ireland-left-union


----------



## CMAC (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			An interesting comparison with NI

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/08/would-anyone-care-if-northern-ireland-left-union

Click to expand...

Yes I had tried to put myself in the same shoes if it was Wales or NI. I hope NI goes for it and I think we would all support it.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Yes I had tried to put myself in the same shoes if it was Wales or NI. I hope NI goes for it and I think we would all support it.
		
Click to expand...

But I thought you were against Scotland voting YES?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			But I thought you were against Scotland voting YES?
		
Click to expand...

over 500 of my posts on this thread and you have to ask- Jees I must try harder:ears:


----------



## Dodger (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It's all pathetic it really is - beyond pathetic 

*It appears this vote is ripping a country apart* - for a vote that is supposed to all about the good of the country it appears to be the total opposite.

The negative feeling that has grown between both parties is going to ruin Scotland

Oh and the article didn't say that people were signing Rule Britannia then beating Yes campaigners 

*They said it followed several earlier incidents in which they had been verbally abused by a gang bearing the Union Flag and singing Rule, Britannia!*

Click to expand...

Any links for this ridiculous claim?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

My feelings for wanting Scotland to stay part of the UK aren't motivated by finance or political reasons so if Wales and N Ireland had a vote it would be the same as I feel now.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			An interesting comparison with NI

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/08/would-anyone-care-if-northern-ireland-left-union

Click to expand...

With their history and at this present moment in time IMHO it's not going to happen.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Any links for this ridiculous claim?
		
Click to expand...

As I said "it appears from what I'm seeing on social media and other outlets" in regards the ill feeling between the two separate sides 

But as the other poster after me has said this is more the minority.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

CMAC said:



			over 500 of my posts on this thread and you have to ask- Jees I must try harder:ears:
		
Click to expand...

So, 

support for NI leaving UK-yes
support for Scotland leaving UK- no

?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 3, 2014)

Phill......you are frantically trying to find cases of 'breaking the country apart'.
I can tell you from living here that I see no signs of it.
As a nation we are having a great debate and as you can see from the expected polling it is involving nearly everyone.

There is the odd numpty on both sides but we just shake our heads at them and get on with it.

I was really surprised that there was not one negative comment aimed at Jim Sillars last night.
This from a hall of over 200 folk.
Europe and EFTA and old/new Labour were the only areas that sparked an audience debate.
It was good humoured enlightening debate.

I am hugely proud to live in a country that behaves in this way.
After 18th Sept, whatever happens I think we shall just get on with it.

With a no vote don't expect many Scottish MP's at Westminster from the Tories or Lib/Dems.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So, 

support for NI leaving UK-yes
support for Scotland leaving UK- no

?
		
Click to expand...

Yes I found that a bit strange.
Why the double standard?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Phill......you are frantically trying to find cases of 'breaking the country apart'.
I can tell you from living here that I see no signs of it.
As a nation we are having a great debate and as you can see from the expected polling it is involving nearly everyone.

There is the odd numpty on both sides but we just shake our heads at them and get on with it.

I was really surprised that there was not one negative comment aimed at Jim Sillars last night.
This from a hall of over 200 folk.
Europe and EFTA and old/new Labour were the only areas that sparked an audience debate.
It was good humoured enlightening debate.

I am hugely proud to live in a country that behaves in this way.
After 18th Sept, whatever happens I think we shall just get on with it.

*With a no vote don't expect many Scottish MP's at Westminster from the Tories or Lib/Dems*.
		
Click to expand...

With a NO victory I expect Scotland to return many more SNP MPs than normal.Currently the Scottish voter is pretty smart, being able to separate Holyrood and Westminster elections.

With the massive new engagement of politics currently happening I can forsee a backlash from indy campaigners post NO and a drive to elect SNP.I genuinely think Labour, in its current form in Scotland are done.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Phill......you are frantically trying to find cases of 'breaking the country apart'.
I can tell you from living here that I see no signs of it.
As a nation we are having a great debate and as you can see from the expected polling it is involving nearly everyone.

There is the odd numpty on both sides but we just shake our heads at them and get on with it.

I was really surprised that there was not one negative comment aimed at Jim Sillars last night.
This from a hall of over 200 folk.
Europe and EFTA and old/new Labour were the only areas that sparked an audience debate.
It was good humoured enlightening debate.

I am hugely proud to live in a country that behaves in this way.
After 18th Sept, whatever happens I think we shall just get on with it.

With a no vote don't expect many Scottish MP's at Westminster from the Tories or Lib/Dems.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not frantically trying to find anything 

Seen a few people from the yes side trying to frantically find episodes of abuse from No supporters - but I guess if there is the odd numpty there is nothing to worry about 

Oh there is a few posts directed at you other the last 24 hours looking for some facts from you to back up some of your claims - I'm guessing you are ready to provide it ?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So, 

support for NI leaving UK-yes
support for Scotland leaving UK- no

?
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			Yes I found that a bit strange.
Why the double standard?
		
Click to expand...

what double standard? I don't live there and I'm not Northern Irish.

No wonder you YES campaigners get tied up in knots with these kind of ridiculous accusations.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 3, 2014)

According to PMQs the head of the EU has stated that if an iscot adopt the pound they will not be permitted into the EU. It looks like a Yes vote would manage something those anti EU Tory's failed to achieve.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

CMAC said:



			what double standard? I don't live there and I'm not Northern Irish.

No wonder you YES campaigners get tied up in knots with these kind of ridiculous accusations.
		
Click to expand...

I've not accused you of anything (yet  )

Can you see where I'm confused?George Galloway and various other slebs who signed that declaration of love also seem to think the same as you...but I don't get it?

You don't have to, but can you explain why the difference bewteen NI & Scotland being indy?


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 3, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I don't live there.
		
Click to expand...

If you did, and depending on the whiskey you drank, the answer would be obviouse.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			According to PMQs the head of the EU has stated that if an iscot adopt the pound they will not be permitted into the EU. It looks like a Yes vote would manage something those anti EU Tory's failed to achieve.
		
Click to expand...

A wee bit more complicated than that old dear.

If Scotland decides to use the Â£ outside a currency union, they'd have no central bank, no lender of last resort...something required to be come a EU member state.

Which makes me and my version on iScotland yet again correct. No Â£, no EU.  

Scottish currency and EFTA.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 3, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A wee bit more complicated than that old dear.

If Scotland decides to use the Â£ outside a currency union, they'd have no central bank, no lender of last resort...something required to be come a EU member state.

Which makes me and my version on iScotland yet again correct. No Â£, no EU.  

Scottish currency and EFTA.
		
Click to expand...

But your man isn't going down this route


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 3, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			But your man isn't going down this route
		
Click to expand...

Who's my man?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 3, 2014)

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/inde...nce-of-payments-would-double-without-scotland

Just one click on Google usually does it Phil.

Now you can return the compliment and show the opposite.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.newsnetscotland.com/inde...nce-of-payments-would-double-without-scotland

Just one click on Google usually does it Phil.

Now you can return the compliment and show the opposite.
		
Click to expand...

And one click gets you an article over two years old which shows nothing conclusive and old 

Why would I need to show you anything opposite ?

But what Val posted in replay to your post is a good start I guess

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-27048036


----------



## CMAC (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And one click gets you an article over two years old which shows nothing conclusive and old 

Why would I need to show you anything opposite ?
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And one click gets you an article over two years old which shows nothing conclusive and old 

Why would I need to show you anything opposite ?
		
Click to expand...

I think it is because you would struggle to.

BTW may be two years old but I think things have improved quite a bit since then.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think it is because you would struggle to.

BTW may be two years old but I think things have improved quite a bit since then.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-27048036

Sorry it's not two years old


----------



## Val (Sep 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think it is because you would struggle to.

BTW may be two years old but I think things have improved quite a bit since then.
		
Click to expand...

Doon, do you still have no reply to my facts with link disputing your claim with no link?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-27048036

Sorry it's not two years old
		
Click to expand...

40 love......


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 3, 2014)

CMAC said:



			40 love......
		
Click to expand...

I thought we were comparing balance of payments?

BTW X 2 The figures Phil gave were during the Grangemouth shut down so no surprise.


----------



## DCB (Sep 3, 2014)

Amazing how hard it is to get an unbiased source to back up arguments on here. Seems that's another battle the yes campaign seems to be winning although I'd bet they wouldn't admit it


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 3, 2014)

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...ublishes-scottish-independence-info-1-3497719

Some good stuff here from Sir Tom, someone we can all trust for an honest opinion.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...ublishes-scottish-independence-info-1-3497719

Some good stuff here from Sir Tom, *someone we can all trust for an honest opinion*.
		
Click to expand...

he says, and I quote "Like many voters, I am genuinely undecided, but I donâ€™t feel that the campaigns so far have given me the facts and unbiased assessment to make a properly informed decision. I know I am not alone in thinking this way.

â€œA recent poll commissioned by the Hunter Foundation and published in early July showed 56% of undecided voters simply donâ€™t feel they have enough impartial information to make a decision. And 45% of all voters claim they donâ€™t trust either the UK or the Scottish Governmentâ€™s predictions"

You do realise he isnt commenting on the 16 questions.

Anyway, heres a link for the book for anyone who wants to read it http://www.futureukandscotland.ac.uk/sites/default/files/papers/Scotland's Decision final ebook.pdf


----------



## Dodger (Sep 3, 2014)

We have people giving it "show me something to prove this and show me something to prove that" when in reality nobody knows what the hang is going to happen whichever way this goes.

Christ show me what's going to happen after the next General Election.

In fact show me what's going to happen before that!

What will be will be and I am willing to go YES and give it a go in the hope that a difference can be made.............it might be the wrong move it might be the right move......who the hell knows!!!


----------



## Liverbirdie (Sep 3, 2014)

I have only rarely dipped into this thread, and it may have been covered elsewhere, but is there a general split along class lines on the "support".

Are working class generally voting yes, and middle/upper no. Or even the other way round.

#justwondering


----------



## ger147 (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverbirdie said:



			I have only rarely dipped into this thread, and it may have been covered elsewhere, but is there a general split along class lines on the "support".

Are working class generally voting yes, and middle/upper no. Or even the other way round.

#justwondering
		
Click to expand...

Nope


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 3, 2014)

Liverbirdie said:



			I have only rarely dipped into this thread, and it may have been covered elsewhere, but is there a general split along class lines on the "support".

Are working class generally voting yes, and middle/upper no. Or even the other way round.

#justwondering
		
Click to expand...

No........ last nights meeting was what I would call a good broad church.
I would have liked to see more younger ones.
Local farmers, businessmen/women, workers, more women than I would have expected.
I think the women actually outnumbered the men.
Even a few Turnberry members !


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 3, 2014)

Dodger said:



			We have people giving it "show me something to prove this and show me something to prove that" when in reality nobody knows what the hang is going to happen whichever way this goes.

Christ show me what's going to happen after the next General Election.

In fact show me what's going to happen before that!

What will be will be and I am willing to go YES and give it a go in the hope that a difference can be made.............it might be the wrong move it might be the right move......who the hell knows!!!

Click to expand...

Which is all true and you know that it will possibly be a shambles after a YES unless the people and the politicians pull together with business and work and attract the broader international community to make it work.  Will they or won't they? Again - who knows.  But with a YES it is in the hands of everyone in Scotland to make it the success or failure it will be - and whatever it will be - it will be.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			No........ last nights meeting was what I would call a good broad church.
I would have liked to see more younger ones.
Local farmers, businessmen/women, workers, more women than I would have expected.
I think the women actually outnumbered the men.
Even a few Turnberry members !
		
Click to expand...

Which is why the pols could be wonky - how do you choose a representative sample when voting intentions do not follow any pattern across the Scottish electorate.  

The audience for the 2nd Salmodn/Darling debate was chosen to be representative - but was subsequently claimed clearly to be biased towards YES.  Maybe it was; or maybe YES members of audience were just more vocal; orr maybe the representative sample chosen for the audience simply highlighted the problem the pollsters have.  Apriori it looked representative - but maybe it was skewed to YES. Who lknows.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 3, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Which is all true and you know that it will possibly be a shambles after a YES unless the people and the politicians pull together with business and work and attract the broader international community to make it work.  Will they or won't they? Again - who knows.  But with a YES *it is in the hands of everyone in Scotland to make it the success or failure* it will be - and whatever it will be - it will be.
		
Click to expand...

It's not really, though, is it? It's down to the politicians more than anyone else and what a useless shower they have proven themselves to be. The rest of us will just keep working, paying whatever taxes might be etc etc..... and deal with whatever fallout comes our way.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 3, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It's not really, though, is it? It's down to the politicians more than anyone else and what a useless shower they have proven themselves to be. The rest of us will just keep working, paying whatever taxes might be etc etc..... and deal with whatever fallout comes our way.
		
Click to expand...

Status quo then.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Sep 3, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Status quo then.
		
Click to expand...

Are they playing at the After Referendum Party?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 3, 2014)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Are they playing at the After Referendum Party? 

Click to expand...

Naw Eddie Reader.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 3, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Naw Eddie Reader.
		
Click to expand...

 plus a Calum Kennedy and Andy Stewart video.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 3, 2014)

Did anyone spot the post on the Sir Tom Hunter site were the English owned major supermarkets pay all of their VAT earned from Scottish shoppers in England where their headquarters are.  I assume that a Scottish Government would claim that VAT at source.
Or am I wrong?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 3, 2014)

So the latest story all over the social media is that if Scotland don't have their own central bank they won't be allowed into the EU ? 

I thought this was already known ?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 4, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So the latest story all over the social media is that if Scotland don't have their own central bank they won't be allowed into the EU ? 

I thought this was already known ?
		
Click to expand...

it is, but Salmond said it will be alright and the BOE will support Scotland using the pound.

Soapy Souter said tonight at the Aberdeen debate that he's spoken with one backbencher who said it will happen. So it must be true.



Just for arguments sake, lets say they did, does that mean in the event of a YES vote that a foreign bank will dictate our interest and mortgage rates? how is that independent?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 4, 2014)

CMAC said:



			it is, but Salmond said it will be alright and the BOE will support Scotland using the pound.

Soapy Souter said tonight at the Aberdeen debate that he's spoken with one backbencher who said it will happen. So it must be true.



Just for arguments sake, lets say they did, does that mean in the event of a YES vote that a foreign bank will dictate our interest and mortgage rates? how is that independent? 

Click to expand...

Though aren't we all already in the hands of the markets and speculators in any case...

And are Germany and France independant countries?


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 4, 2014)

CMAC said:



			it is, but Salmond said it will be alright and the BOE will support Scotland using the pound.

Soapy Souter said tonight at the Aberdeen debate that he's spoken with one backbencher who said it will happen. So it must be true.

Just for arguments sake, lets say they did, does that mean in the event of a YES vote that a foreign bank will dictate our interest and mortgage rates? how is that independent? 

Click to expand...

About the same as the EU Central Bank doing it with the Euro.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 4, 2014)

Sharing the pound will keep it's value up. Best for Scotland and rUK.
I can't believe that Osbourne and Co. would deliberately set in motion something that would quite seriously damage the wealth of rUK.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 4, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			About the same as the EU Central Bank doing it with the Euro.
		
Click to expand...

thats for countries using the Euro we will be independant and using someone elses pound. Everything they are fighting for is to make their own decisions...............how do you do that when rates are set outside your control?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Sharing the pound will keep it's value up. Best for Scotland and rUK.
*I can't believe that Osbourne and Co. would deliberately set in motion* something that would quite seriously damage the wealth of rUK.
		
Click to expand...

there you go again, hoping it will be alright and ignoring the facts and factual statements already made.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 4, 2014)

I think the Yes vote need to take care. The UK government and the opposition have made it very clear that iscot will not be able to use the pound. If they want a pound then they can have a pound but it will not be aligned to UK central bank.

It would now take a very brave politician to turn round and explain to the RUK that it was just a ruse and they were only kidding and yes we will run the Scottish economy.

RUK will not be the same after a yes vote which is fairly obvious but IMHO the RUK will not have any truck with any political party that gives an inch to a country that has decided that it doesn't wish to be part of GB.

PS you'll be governed by the EU anyway as all but a few want to join the party.

SLH you still haven't said if you have moved to back to Scotland and you seem to have started putting a lot of We's back into your post.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

The currency has always been a stumbling block/bone of contention for the Yes and No camps respectively.

I've yet to see any conclusive evidence either way on the subject.

Salmonds say's well use it as currency union. Westminster say no you wont.

Hardly answers the question or helps people make an informed judgement.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			The currency has always been a stumbling block/bone of contention for the Yes and No camps respectively.

I've yet to see any conclusive evidence either way on the subject.

Salmonds say's well use it as currency union. Westminster say no you wont.

Hardly answers the question or helps people make an informed judgement.
		
Click to expand...

An i Scotland can use the pound, even Darling admitted that.
And it is the independent BOE [ie Bank of UK as it stands] who will make decisions re lending rates.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 4, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			SLH you still haven't said if you have moved to back to Scotland and you seem to have started putting a lot of We's back into your post.
		
Click to expand...

I can differentiate quite easily between Scots the world over and the Scottish Electorate.  I am part of the 'we Scots' but not 'the Scottish electorate'


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			An i Scotland can use the pound, even Darling admitted that.
And it is the independent BOE [ie Bank of UK as it stands] who will make decisions re lending rates.
		
Click to expand...

So why is there still confusion?

Why is currency still an issue?


----------



## Val (Sep 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			An i Scotland can use the pound, even Darling admitted that.
And it is the independent BOE [ie Bank of UK as it stands] who will make decisions re lending rates.
		
Click to expand...

Only if a union is agreed. It can use the pound without one but that would be stupid IMO.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Only if a union is agreed. It can use the pound without one but that would be stupid IMO.
		
Click to expand...

Is this the scenario that wouldn't give a lender of last resort?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 4, 2014)

The thing about the "when it comes to it a currency union will happen" theory is that in all my years I don't think I have ever heard a group of politicians give such a clear cut and unequivocal statement on policy. All the main players in all the mainstream parties will be dead in the water if they turn around now and say "ok we'll have a currency union after all". They've nailed their colours to the mast and have nowhere to go....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			So why is there still confusion?

Why is currency still an issue?
		
Click to expand...

I watched a debate from Aberdeen last night.  The currency issue may still be very significant for NO voters - but I get impression that for the others  - they get it - and would like BT to stop going on about it - it's a stuck record. As soon as Jim Murphy raised it groans all around - yes of course that's how YES supporters will react - but I don't think it's really helping the NO cause now.


----------



## Val (Sep 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			The thing about the "when it comes to it a currency union will happen" theory is that in all my years I don't think I have ever heard a group of politicians give such a clear cut and unequivocal statement on policy. All the main players in all the mainstream parties will be dead in the water if they turn around now and say "ok we'll have a currency union after all". They've nailed their colours to the mast and have nowhere to go....
		
Click to expand...

They would do it with a compromise though, ie nukes on the Clyde or whatever it maybe but a compromise none the less.


----------



## Val (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Is this the scenario that wouldn't give a lender of last resort?
		
Click to expand...

Yip, and rates for borrowing in this case would be as bad as using a pay day lender


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Yip, and rates for borrowing in this case would be as bad as using a pay day lender
		
Click to expand...

So that would me no EU membership?

Sounds to me like, although people are sick of hearing about it, the issue of currency hasn't really been solved?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			The thing about the "when it comes to it a currency union will happen" theory is that in all my years I don't think I have ever heard a group of politicians give such a clear cut and unequivocal statement on policy. All the main players in all the mainstream parties will be dead in the water if they turn around now and say "ok we'll have a currency union after all". They've nailed their colours to the mast and have nowhere to go....
		
Click to expand...

Without wishing to sound rude are the three leaders not 'dead in the water' already.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Without wishing to sound rude are the three leaders not 'dead in the water' already.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting thought that.  If there is a YES two weeks (eeek!) today then wherefore art thou Messrs Miliband, Cameron and Clegg?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



*An i Scotland can use the pound, even Darling admitted that.*
And it is the independent BOE [ie Bank of UK as it stands] who will make decisions re lending rates.
		
Click to expand...

selective listening and comprehension.

He stated you can use whatever you want, the pound, dollar, yen etc etc. there is nothing to stop you using smarties as currency but if you arent supported by a central bank there is no stability and no country will lend to you especially if you have a track record of defaulting on a debt which Salmond has said he will do.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 4, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Interesting thought that.  If there is a YES two weeks (eeek!) today then wherefore art thou Messrs Miliband, *Cameron* and Clegg?
		
Click to expand...

isnt Cameron involved in something far more serious right now, and that's where he should be as our PM


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Without wishing to sound rude are the three leaders not 'dead in the water' already.
		
Click to expand...

Only Clegg but he's still in denial.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Only Clegg but he's still in denial.
		
Click to expand...

He's in Egypt?!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 4, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			He's in Egypt?!
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, his head is in the sand.....


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 4, 2014)

Crikey the Yes campaigners have been out in force in Cumbernauld, every (and I mean every) lamp post has a massive Yes banner on it


----------



## ger147 (Sep 4, 2014)

Beezerk said:



			Crikey the Yes campaigners have been out in force in Cumbernauld, every (and I mean every) lamp post has a massive Yes banner on it 

Click to expand...

Been like that for a few weeks now. The No's were round the doors last week.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Only if a union is agreed. It can use the pound without one but that would be stupid IMO.
		
Click to expand...




Gareth said:



			Is this the scenario that wouldn't give a lender of last resort?
		
Click to expand...




FairwayDodger said:



			The thing about the "when it comes to it a currency union will happen" theory is that in all my years I don't think I have ever heard a group of politicians give such a clear cut and unequivocal statement on policy. All the main players in all the mainstream parties will be dead in the water if they turn around now and say "ok we'll have a currency union after all". They've nailed their colours to the mast and have nowhere to go....
		
Click to expand...




Gareth said:



			So that would me no EU membership?

Sounds to me like, although people are sick of hearing about it, the issue of currency hasn't really been solved?
		
Click to expand...

Been saying for ever, no currency union=no lender of last resort=no EU.

no currency union=no sharing of debt*= devaluing of Â£= balance of payments skewed

* debt is owned by UK, if Scotland leaves UK, we leave debt.And don't come back saying who would lend to someone who defaulted on their loan, we're not defaulting on anything.The fact that debt is owned by The UK has been confirmed by the treasury, so it's not made up stuff, but confirmed UK govt fact.

Another one: Pensions.If Scotland votes YES, we'd have no pensions to pay.As confirmed by the Dept for work and pensions, The UK govt is liable for continuing to pay the pensions of those who have paid into the pot.An example would be Terry and June from Plymouth who retired to Spain to live our their golden years.They still get a pension, don't they?Bill from NI who's moved to Australia to be close to his grandchild, he still gets his pension from UK.So every single pensioner in Scotland would be paid their pension that they've contributed to by Westminster.

So two govt departments confirming they're liable for UK debt and continuing to pay pensioners of Scottish based pensioners. That's an incredible amount of money.

Better Together are now so desperate in the face of rising support for YES that they've had Rifkind/Lang/Forsyth have been rolled out to help.Three arch tories attempting convince Scotland of the merits of the union.Nearly as comical as Darling/Brown lecturing on the economy.

But the frantic attempts and panic mode shows one thing: YES has all the momentum, NO are still basing their entire campaign on negativity and fear, simply because they know they're goosed on so many levels.

But when all that is said, most sensible Scottish folk want to continue contributing to the financial burden we find ourselves in, even if we don't actually have to.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Been saying for ever, no currency union=no lender of last resort=no EU.

no currency union=no sharing of debt*= devaluing of Â£= balance of payments skewed

* debt is owned by UK, if Scotland leaves UK, we leave debt.And don't come back saying who would lend to someone who defaulted on their loan, we're not defaulting on anything.The fact that debt is owned by The UK has been confirmed by the treasury, so it's not made up stuff, but confirmed UK govt fact.

Another one: Pensions.If Scotland votes YES, we'd have no pensions to pay.As confirmed by the Dept for work and pensions, The UK govt is liable for continuing to pay the pensions of those who have paid into the pot.An example would be Terry and June from Plymouth who retired to Spain to live our their golden years.They still get a pension, don't they?Bill from NI who's moved to Australia to be close to his grandchild, he still gets his pension from UK.So every single pensioner in Scotland would be paid their pension that they've contributed to by Westminster.

So two govt departments confirming they're liable for UK debt and continuing to pay pensioners of Scottish based pensioners. That's an incredible amount of money.

Better Together are now so desperate in the face of rising support for YES that they've had Rifkind/Lang/Forsyth have been rolled out to help.Three arch tories attempting convince Scotland of the merits of the union.Nearly as comical as Darling/Brown lecturing on the economy.

But the frantic attempts and panic mode shows one thing: YES has all the momentum, NO are still basing their entire campaign on negativity and fear, simply because they know they're goosed on so many levels.

But when all that is said, most sensible Scottish folk want to continue contributing to the financial burden we find ourselves in, even if we don't actually have to.
		
Click to expand...

Wow, that actually comes across really poorly off you. You would be prepared to completely screw over the rest of the UK, so you could avoid your debts. If that's the moral basis of an iScot then it could go downhill pretty quickly.


----------



## turkish (Sep 4, 2014)

Posted my No vote the other day!!! 

Starting to think the Yes campaigners will win though unfortunately


----------



## the smiling assassin (Sep 4, 2014)

so the uk has to honour payments for pensions but an iS won't have to honour payments for national debt - wow that almost sounds to good to be true. got to admire your blind faith in der propaganda.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			But the frantic attempts and panic mode shows one thing: YES has all the momentum, NO are still basing their entire campaign on negativity and fear, simply because they know they're goosed on so many levels.
		
Click to expand...

Having watched a couple of the debates recently I do agree with you about the momentum. Less so about negativity and fear, both sides are indulging in that, "no" struggle in the sense that it's not easy to argue for the status quo against a backdrop of high debt, austerity and disillusionment.

I'd say "yes" is winning the debate. Problem is we're having the wrong debate. I've said it before but for me it's a decision that should be based for more on philosophy, culture and identity than any short term economic gain or loss. I have no doubt that the UK will have better times ahead and also that an independent Scotland would be successful. Since this takes up about 95% of the debate I have become very frustrated listening to both sides spin it. I'm not saying there isn't a place to discuss the economics of the proposal but it has become all-consuming and tedious.

Better together talk about having "the best of both worlds" but, in a sense, it's the nats that seem to want their cake and eat it. They want independence but will keep the pound, and the head of state. They'll disarm but remain protected within a nuclear alliance. They are disingenuous when discussing certain policies as part of the independence package when they already have all the power devolved to put them into place.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 4, 2014)

Bitter Together seem to have totally messed up on this one.
Went into it 70/30 and thought all they had to do was threaten Yes supporters about the pound and it would collapse.

Interesting that since the Three Amegios issued their joint threat the polls have steadily gone towards YES.
I think at this moment the only way they can come back is to issue a joint party statement about what they would definitely offer Scotland re Devo Max.
Can't see that happening.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Wow, that actually comes across really poorly off you. You would be prepared to completely screw over the rest of the UK, so you could avoid your debts. If that's the moral basis of an iScot then it could go downhill pretty quickly.
		
Click to expand...

I always think it's best to read something in its entirety prior to passing comment.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I always think it's best to read something in its entirety prior to passing comment.
		
Click to expand...

Having one passing comment at the end didn't cover what I felt the rest of your post was intending!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Having one passing comment at the end didn't cover what I felt the rest of your post was intending!
		
Click to expand...

The comments on pensions and debt aren't my opinion, they're the opinion of the dept of work and pension and the treasury, I was only pointing out these facts.My opinion was the last three paragraphs.

Scotland wants to pay its way, Scotland won't be held to ransom by anyone on currency,EU membership,nuclear weapons or defence.Once we vote YES, we'll see how the politicians deal with things, but I'd rather have Salmond walking into the room for me over Cameron/Milliband or Clegg.

We'll pay what we're due and we'll get what we deserve.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Been saying for ever, no currency union=no lender of last resort=no EU.

no currency union=no sharing of debt*= devaluing of Â£= balance of payments skewed

* debt is owned by UK, if Scotland leaves UK, we leave debt.And don't come back saying who would lend to someone who defaulted on their loan, we're not defaulting on anything.The fact that debt is owned by The UK has been confirmed by the treasury, so it's not made up stuff, but confirmed UK govt fact.

Another one: Pensions.If Scotland votes YES, we'd have no pensions to pay.As confirmed by the Dept for work and pensions, The UK govt is liable for continuing to pay the pensions of those who have paid into the pot.An example would be Terry and June from Plymouth who retired to Spain to live our their golden years.They still get a pension, don't they?Bill from NI who's moved to Australia to be close to his grandchild, he still gets his pension from UK.So every single pensioner in Scotland would be paid their pension that they've contributed to by Westminster.

So two govt departments confirming they're liable for UK debt and continuing to pay pensioners of Scottish based pensioners. That's an incredible amount of money.

Better Together are now so desperate in the face of rising support for YES that they've had Rifkind/Lang/Forsyth have been rolled out to help.Three arch tories attempting convince Scotland of the merits of the union.Nearly as comical as Darling/Brown lecturing on the economy.

But the frantic attempts and panic mode shows one thing: YES has all the momentum, NO are still basing their entire campaign on negativity and fear, simply because they know they're goosed on so many levels.

But when all that is said, most sensible Scottish folk want to continue contributing to the financial burden we find ourselves in, even if we don't actually have to.
		
Click to expand...

So it's all sweetness and light should a yes vote be posted. No debt and everything you want, pensions, defence, pound the lot?

Clearly the propaganda men earned their corn here :rofl:

Simple question for you Adi'. If it's all sweetness and light (Or have your cake and eat it), why are so many Scot's reluctant to vote yes?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 4, 2014)

Salmond has clearly stated on many occasions that Scots wish to pick up their share of the old Uk debt.

He has also implied that if rUk wish to play 'hard ball' in any further agreements, they have not chosen a good place to start from.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Salmond has clearly stated on many occasions that Scots wish to pick up their share of the old Uk debt.

He has also implied that if rUk wish to play 'hard ball' in any further agreements, they have not chosen a good place to start from.
		
Click to expand...

Neither would be in a good place to start IMO.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Simple question for you Adi'. If it's all sweetness and light (Or have your cake and eat it), why are so many Scot's reluctant to vote yes?
		
Click to expand...

I'd strongly suspect a lot of it is fear of the unknown and/or distrust of the main protagonist! And of course, there are plenty of Pro-Union voters as well.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			So it's all sweetness and light should a yes vote be posted. No debt and everything you want, pensions, defence, pound the lot?

Clearly the propaganda men earned their corn here :rofl:

Simple question for you Adi'. If it's all sweetness and light (Or have your cake and eat it), why are so many Scot's reluctant to vote yes?
		
Click to expand...

If you can point out where I said I wanted all of the above I'd appreciate it, also if I claimed sweetness and light or cake and eat it too.If not don't interpret what I say please, it's tiresome.

As for so many folk voting NO.I dunno.I could guess at a few though-

Better the devil you know
A deep love of the union
Dislike of Salmond
A fear of uncertainty
Believing the line BT have followed


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I'd strongly suspect a lot of it is fear of the unknown and/or distrust of the main protagonist! And of course, there are plenty of Pro-Union voters as well.
		
Click to expand...

I suppose the point I'm making is, well, similar to one's made on here in regard to fake clubs/sites. If it's too good to be true, it usually is.

Scotland are, from the Scots I've met, very proud of their nation and heritage, and rightly so.

What I can't get my head round is that if they have the change to become an independent, self governing nation, whay are so many so hesitant?

The facts  Adi has posted throughout this thread seems to show independence and as excellent opportunity. I don't understand the hesitancy?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Neither would be in a good place to start IMO.
		
Click to expand...

The starting point will be dictated equally by Westminster & Holyrood


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If you can point out where I said I wanted all of the above I'd appreciate it, also if I claimed sweetness and light or cake and eat it too.If not don't interpret what I say please, it's tiresome.

As for so many folk voting NO.I dunno.I could guess at a few though-

*Better the devil you know
A deep love of the union
Dislike of Salmond
A fear of uncertainty
Believing the line BT have followed*

Click to expand...

Apologies for the earlier part of my post, it was tongue in check but didn't read that way.

As for the bit in bold, seriously?

Would people really let their dis-trust/like of Salmond cloud such an important issue?

Could you also expand on uncertainty a little? Have the Yes campaigners not made things overly clear or do you mean regarding negotiation post-yes?


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The starting point will be dictated equally by Westminster & Holyrood
		
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. 

When we start talking about national debt no place is good to start. if the Union were in positive equity, it would perhaps be a little easier.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If you can point out where I said I wanted all of the above I'd appreciate it, also if I claimed sweetness and light or cake and eat it too.If not don't interpret what I say please, it's tiresome.

As for so many folk voting NO.I dunno.I could guess at a few though-

Better the devil you know
A deep love of the union
Dislike of Salmond
A fear of uncertainty
Believing the line BT have followed
		
Click to expand...

A philosophical belief that people should be coming together rather than pushing apart
Feeling a British identity as well as a Scottish identity
Simply not seeing any point in or need for independence


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			A philosophical belief that people should be coming together rather than pushing apart
Feeling a British identity as well as a Scottish identity
*Simply not seeing any point in or need for independence*

Click to expand...

Despite the positives it may bring Karen?


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			I suppose the point I'm making is, well, similar to one's made on here in regard to fake clubs/sites. If it's too good to be true, it usually is.

Scotland are, from the Scots I've met, very proud of their nation and heritage, and rightly so.

What I can't get my head round is that if they have the change to become an independent, self governing nation, whay are so many so hesitant?

The facts  Adi has posted throughout this thread seems to show independence and as excellent opportunity. I don't understand the hesitancy?
		
Click to expand...

Just because 95% (or whatever) of Scots are proud of their nation and heritage doesn't mean that they all want to leave the Union/be independent!

The analogy with fake clubs/sites is a very poor one imo.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			The facts  Adi has posted throughout this thread seems to show independence and as excellent opportunity. I don't understand the hesitancy?
		
Click to expand...




Gareth said:



			Apologies for the earlier part of my post, it was tongue in check but didn't read that way.

As for the bit in bold, seriously?

Would people really let their dis-trust/like of Salmond cloud such an important issue?

Could you also expand on uncertainty a little? Have the Yes campaigners not made things overly clear or do you mean regarding negotiation post-yes?
		
Click to expand...

Cool.

I genuinely don't understand the hesitancy,but I don't understand why the polls are even remotely close.Use Catalunya as a reasonable comparison.They're just about to have a referendum too and they're looking at 80-90% yes vote.The ability to self determine should be automatic and the resistance to it is totally alien to me.

Salmond:Not the most popular person, although that seems to be changing somewhat.I only use his real name on here as I've been warned not use his usual moniker by admins.I really don't like him or his party.Tartan Tories is a wee bit false but just a wee bit.

Uncertainty: If all the sources of your information keep telling you something, there's a pretty good chance most folk will accept it as fact.The Scotsman,The BBC,The Daily Record,The Express,Post,Daily Mail all have something in the game, all have something in the game for the union.The neutrality that should be in the media doesn't exist.Only The Sunday Herald have officially come out as pro-yes...although that's changing as they all realise the vote is changing.If it wasn't for twitter/facebook the independence movement would be dead in the water, and to use a Scottish Football analogy, if it wasn't for twitter/facebook the issues of Rangers would never have come to light.The MSM in Scotland are generally regarded as corrupt by alot of folk.Corrupt is maybe a wee bit strong, but just a wee bit.
The independence movement is street-led, social media driven by outfits like wingsoverscotland,newsnetscotland,bella caledonia or the common weal.

It's David vs Goliath.

The other thing to consider ( and this might not go down very well, but it could be a factor): Scotland and it's people are considered proud and vocal.This is probably true of the current under 30's.But folk over a certain age?Timid folk scared of the day they'll never see.The 70'80's in Scotland with de industrialisation, heroin addiction and Thatcherism has destroyed swathes of communities to be so unconfident of themselves and their capacity they forgot ( or have never known) what Scotland has given the world ( if anyone wants to know I'd be happy to post it  )


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			A philosophical belief that people should be coming together rather than pushing apart
Feeling a British identity as well as a Scottish identity
Simply not seeing any point in or need for independence
		
Click to expand...

All reasonable suggestions as possible factors.

You'll always be British, a point I never tire of making...fracking or no fracking, we'll always be British
I'm not pushing apart from anyone, I want to be a good neighbour, one that accepts reponsibilty for its actions and works well for each others gains.
The last one, if you can't see the point that's a real shame.I can't see the logic in not being independent but I've at least tried!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Despite the positives it may bring Karen?
		
Click to expand...

That's what I don't understand... Even though the whole debate is (wrongly) framed around economics, I don't see any positives that either aren't currently or couldn't be in future achieved within the UK.

To me, it just seems we'd be swapping one government for another. Don't see the point, really don't.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The last one, if you can't see the point that's a real shame.I can't see the logic in not being independent but I've at least tried!
		
Click to expand...

Oh I've tried. I've watched enough about it on telly, listened on radio, talked nonsense on here with you and others but, when it comes right down to it, independence still seems to me to be driven by a desire to get away from the English rather than anything else.

For all the powerful, uplifting, positive stuff you have (at times) posted, none of it requires us to be independent. Just go out and apply the same passion to making the UK better....


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			...what Scotland has given the world ( if anyone wants to know I'd be happy to post it  )
		
Click to expand...

Anyone who has perused the walls of the Cellar Bar in St Andrews's Scores Hotel should get some idea!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Oh I've tried. I've watched enough about it on telly, listened on radio, talked nonsense on here with you and others but,* when it comes right down to it, independence still seems to me to be driven by a desire to get away from the English rather than anything else.*

For all the powerful, uplifting, positive stuff you have (at times) posted, none of it requires us to be independent. Just go out and apply the same passion to making the UK better....
		
Click to expand...

you've not tried hard enough,then.I've said it before, I love England and the English ( except sporting events).This isn;t about England, it's about Scotland.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			you've not tried hard enough,then.I've said it before, I love England and the English ( except sporting events).This isn;t about England, it's about Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Didn't mean you, as you have made your own views quite clear, but that is the driver for lots of people.


----------



## turkish (Sep 4, 2014)

Ok well the fact you "genuinely" dont know shows a tad of ignorance! I'm not too ignorant to understand why Yes voters wish to leave the Union but it is a difference of opinion.... something the yes campaigners fail to understand- don't dare try and tell me i'm wrong because I won't tell you that you are wrong.

 but I'll bite and tell you why I am voting No!!! 

I'm proudly Scottish, I'm proudly British. I strongly believe that our sovereign state is Great. I think in comparative terms our union is globally strong, we provide great health care, our economy is comparatively strong. I think our future as a Union looks bright. The hippy in me believes we should be bringing together nations not breaking them up- as said above a philosophical thought of bringing people together.

 I believe that Westminster do look after the rest of the union but agree that for too long they have concentrated far too much on their financial hub (London) and perhaps alienated much of the union, not just other countrys but other parts of England such as the North. But I think that's what's great about a democracy; we all get to vote, we might not like who is in power but we have the chance to change that. I don't like more Lines being drawn- where does that end, North of England don't like who's in charge of westminster so let them break away, or even break it down to a city like Liverpool can they break away? what about a wee town like Bootle if they didn't vote Tory?

I also think the fact they have alieanted a lot of the union will make them sit up and take notice more effort is required throughout the UK not just London post vote!!!

I would also like to point out that myself personally am happy and generally loving my life, and have done since childhood, I genuinely do not see any reason why I would wish to change that. That is not fear factor of not wanting change, that is genuine contentment. 

My sister(who is yes) says that'a fairly selfish argument when there are food banks, poverty out there but again that's what a democracy is- we should all look after our own interests and the collective good comes from it as a union.... but even with that poverty will not end, food banks will not end, charity will not end


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Didn't mean you, as you have made your own views quite clear, but that is the driver for lots of people.
		
Click to expand...

That doesn't make it right, just like voting no because you hate Salmond isn't a valid reason either...and I've heard that one too, sure you have also.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Cool.

I genuinely don't understand the hesitancy,but I don't understand why the polls are even remotely close.Use Catalunya as a reasonable comparison.They're just about to have a referendum too and they're looking at 80-90% yes vote.The ability to self determine should be automatic and the resistance to it is totally alien to me.

Salmond:Not the most popular person, although that seems to be changing somewhat.I only use his real name on here as I've been warned not use his usual moniker by admins.I really don't like him or his party.Tartan Tories is a wee bit false but just a wee bit.

Uncertainty: If all the sources of your information keep telling you something, there's a pretty good chance most folk will accept it as fact.The Scotsman,The BBC,The Daily Record,The Express,Post,Daily Mail all have something in the game, all have something in the game for the union.The neutrality that should be in the media doesn't exist.Only The Sunday Herald have officially come out as pro-yes...although that's changing as they all realise the vote is changing.If it wasn't for twitter/facebook the independence movement would be dead in the water, and to use a Scottish Football analogy, if it wasn't for twitter/facebook the issues of Rangers would never have come to light.The MSM in Scotland are generally regarded as corrupt by alot of folk.Corrupt is maybe a wee bit strong, but just a wee bit.
The independence movement is street-led, social media driven by outfits like wingsoverscotland,newsnetscotland,bella caledonia or the common weal.

It's David vs Goliath.

The other thing to consider ( and this might not go down very well, but it could be a factor): Scotland and it's people are considered proud and vocal.This is probably true of the current under 30's.But folk over a certain age?Timid folk scared of the day they'll never see.The 70'80's in Scotland with de industrialisation, heroin addiction and Thatcherism has destroyed swathes of communities to be so unconfident of themselves and their capacity they forgot ( or have never known) what Scotland has given the world ( if anyone wants to know I'd be happy to post it  )
		
Click to expand...

Some very good and interesting points made there :thup:

From my own, unbiased point, I don't think all the questions have properly been answered.

Currency being the main one. It comes across as all if's, but's and maybe's which, I suppose is that's all it can be before negotiation but still isn't very clear.

There has been quite a bit of posturing, from both sides of the debate, but no real concrete decisions.

Same as anything we currently have, currency is the driving force behind any country. 

You only have to look back at the banking collapse a few years ago to understand the impact of a sharp financial change.

Is an independent Scotland sustainable? Not just now but after North Sea Oil (...And Gas) expire? 

Could an independent Scotland's economy stand up to another financial crisis, post independence?

I, and I don't think anyone truly knows the answer to the above questions with any degree of certainty.

Would an independent Scotland have a big enough GDP to support their population and infrastructure indefinitely? 

I have no idea, and I'm sure the folk running both campaigns don't now either


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 4, 2014)

CMAC said:



			isnt Cameron involved in something far more serious right now, and that's where he should be as our PM
		
Click to expand...

I was meaning wherefore will they be in two weeks following a YES.  I'm thinking Cameron at least won't be having to worry too much about doing a volte-face on this.  In fact it might be one of the easier decisions Westminster have to make,


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			That doesn't make it right, just like voting no because you hate Salmond isn't a valid reason either...and I've heard that one too, sure you have also.
		
Click to expand...

Of course not. 

I don't like him (or his paymaster) but that's not why I'm voting no. 

Short term considerations like that, or who's in power in Westminster or how much oil there is/isn't are completely irrelevant in my eyes but, unfortunately, that's been the entire basis for debate.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 4, 2014)

Yes....from the playing fields of Eton to being responsible for the break up of the union. 

Someone will not be amused.

Nae Backbone.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

turkish said:



			Ok well the fact you "genuinely" dont know shows a tad of ignorance! I'm not too ignorant to understand why Yes voters wish to leave the Union but it is a difference of opinion.... something the yes campaigners fail to understand- don't dare try and tell me i'm wrong because I won't tell you that you are wrong.

 but I'll bite and tell you why I am voting No!!! 

I'm proudly Scottish, I'm proudly British. I strongly believe that our sovereign state is Great. I think in comparative terms our union is globally strong, we provide great health care, our economy is comparatively strong. I think our future as a Union looks bright. The hippy in me believes we should be bringing together nations not breaking them up- as said above a philosophical thought of bringing people together.

 I believe that Westminster do look after the rest of the union but agree that for too long they have concentrated far too much on their financial hub (London) and perhaps alienated much of the union, not just other countrys but other parts of England such as the North. But I think that's what's great about a democracy; we all get to vote, we might not like who is in power but we have the chance to change that. I don't like more Lines being drawn- where does that end, North of England don't like who's in charge of westminster so let them break away, or even break it down to a city like Liverpool can they break away? what about a wee town like Bootle if they didn't vote Tory?

I would also like to point out that myself personally am happy and generally loving my life, and have done since childhood, I genuinely do not see any reason why I would wish to change that. That is not fear factor of not wanting change, that is genuine contentment. 

My sister(who is yes) says that'a fairly selfish argument when there are food banks, poverty out there but again that's what a democracy is- we should all look after our own interests and the collective good comes from it as a union.... but even with that poverty will not end, food banks will not end, charity will not end
		
Click to expand...

Calm down dear.No need to bite, just put your point across.I might be condescending,I might be sarcastic and I might be wrong  Won't stop me from putting my point across though.I do think you are wrong though and here why:

You use the word comparatively a couple of times...comparable with who?Why do feel the need to compare us to anyone?I'm really not interested in how others do things or how others fare, i'm just wanting the best for Scotland.

Our health care is excellent, both north and south of the border.There looks to be a change in direction south of the border though, with the gradual privatisation...maybe the thin end of the wedge?

As for the future of the union if we vote NO.I think most folk agree there is a pretty obvious move to the right in England?There could be a referendum on Europe soon enough.

I'm also happy enough.I make quite alot of money, go on lovely holidays turning left when I board planes sometimes, I've got a nice house, my kids are good enough people, I've got good pals and my health.If Hibs ever do win the Scottish Cup I reckon I'll be complete.But I see how folk live in Pilton and Niddrie or Possil or The Gorbals and see they live in a parallel universe to the one I inhabit.So the question thats been asked this week, if we're better together, why aren't we better together already? But if accept poverty and food banks as being part of society then I can't help with that, you are driven by alternative motives than I am.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			That doesn't make it right, just like voting no because you hate Salmond isn't a valid reason either...and I've heard that one too, sure you have also.
		
Click to expand...

Woah, I'm pretty sure you've said previously that people on the street can vote, based on whatever reasoning they like! Whether that is correct or not!

Apologies if this is wrong, but I can't be bothered to trawl back many pages to find it!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Is an independent Scotland sustainable? Not just now but after North Sea Oil (...And Gas) expire? 

Could an independent Scotland's economy stand up to another financial crisis, post independence?

I, and I don't think anyone truly knows the answer to the above questions with any degree of certainty.

Would an independent Scotland have a big enough GDP to support their population and infrastructure indefinitely?
		
Click to expand...

Of course Scotland is sustainable, with or without oil.

Lets use Iceland as an example.

Shredded by the financial crisis, totally goosed.How are they doing today?
http://www.spiegel.de/international...f-iceland-a-case-worth-studying-a-942387.html

They jailed bankers instead of allowing them to continue their greed.

Scotland will be just fine.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Woah, I'm pretty sure you've said previously that people on the street can vote, based on whatever reasoning they like! Whether that is correct or not!

Apologies if this is wrong, but I can't be bothered to trawl back many pages to find it!
		
Click to expand...

Anyone can use any reason to vote, if that's their reason they can't be wrong.That's not to say I have to agree with their reason.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Of course Scotland is sustainable, with or without oil.

Lets use Iceland as an example.

Shredded by the financial crisis, totally goosed.How are they doing today?
http://www.spiegel.de/international...f-iceland-a-case-worth-studying-a-942387.html

They jailed bankers instead of allowing them to continue their greed.

Scotland will be just fine.
		
Click to expand...

You could also look at Ireland, Italy, Spain and Portugal, even the good old U.S of A (Post Crisis).

Some of those are still recovering.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			You could also look at Ireland, Italy, Spain and Portugal, even the good old U.S of A (Post Crisis).

Some of those are still recovering.
		
Click to expand...

Ireland are doing better than The UK iirc. Southern European basket case countries aren't comparable with Northern ones.

Iceland is a fair one.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

Here's something that my lanky pal Irvine Welsh wrote a year or so back about Scottish/British identity

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2013/01/10/irvine-welsh-on-scottish-independence-and-british-unity/


----------



## turkish (Sep 4, 2014)

Comparative to other nations across the globe. Maybe that's where we differ though- you just want the best for Scotland... I want what's best for the Union, I want what's best for the the Union & ROI, I want what's best for Europe, I believe in the collective, not the separate.

My family come from the Gorbals, you don't need to let me know about poverty... am I happy about it; No, do I think we just accept it as a society; No- we keep struggling along trying to fix. Do I think it will still be here in 100 years; Yes. and I don't think it has a lot to do with Government policies, economy or employment market in general- in General no... of course these things have an effect on this but I think a lot of it has to do with societal problems, and human nature in general. These things aren't going to change with independance.

That question makes no sense; I think we are better together because it's my opinion- there's no comparative like your question suggests as we can't guess the future- again just opinion. You can't why say "we aren't we better together already?" as rhetoric!


----------



## One Planer (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Ireland are doing better than The UK iirc. Southern European basket case countries aren't comparable with Northern ones.

Iceland is a fair one.
		
Click to expand...

Don't Ireland still have a â‚¬22.5 billion loan in place with the IMF? 

That's still a fair old debt to have! Granted not compared to the UK, but still a sizeable debt.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Don't Ireland still have a â‚¬22.5 billion loan in place with the IMF? 

That's still a fair old debt to have! Granted not compared to the UK, but still a sizeable debt.
		
Click to expand...

The economy is on the up turn over there 

House prices on the way back up 

Half built houses being finished 

Jobs being created 

More and more people arriving back into the country 

It's not a boom but it's getting better - a lot of people took pay cuts over the last 5 years but Ireland is recovering and starting to thrive again


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Don't Ireland still have a â‚¬22.5 billion loan in place with the IMF? 

That's still a fair old debt to have! Granted not compared to the UK, but still a sizeable debt.
		
Click to expand...

Â£16 Billion loan.I think thats less than the monthly interest on our debt.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

[video=youtube;23m6CukRUGM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23m6CukRUGM[/video]


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			[video=youtube;23m6CukRUGM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23m6CukRUGM[/video]
		
Click to expand...

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10152355457503589&id=551843588


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 4, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The economy is on the up turn over there 

House prices on the way back up 

Half built houses being finished 

Jobs being created 

More and more people arriving back into the country 

It's not a boom but it's getting better - a lot of people took pay cuts over the last 5 years but Ireland is recovering and starting to thrive again
		
Click to expand...

Which is surely what would happen over time if the Scottish economy bombed following a YES vote.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 4, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Here's something that my lanky pal Irvine Welsh wrote a year or so back about Scottish/British identity

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2013/01/10/irvine-welsh-on-scottish-independence-and-british-unity/

Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of Irvine Welsh. Have enjoyed at least one of his books but was turned against him primarily by one too many vicious and overly generalised rant about Rangers fans..... 

However, that was an interesting read (eventually - what a preamble!). I actually thought he was going to descend into an anti-English rant at one point, even though he was dealing with an issue that also irritates me. In fact, I only kept reading in the knowledge that you wouldn't have posted such a thing.

I'm glad I did - that's maybe as close as I've read to explaining a broader context for independence without getting lost in short term economic minutiae. Maybe even the first thing that's given me pause to see the potential upside of independence over the status quo.

Despite that, I still think independence is the wrong way to go and would much prefer to see the ills of our society resolved within the UK. Perhaps that's an unrealistic, impractical view; I can understand why many feel it would be quicker and easier to achieve much locally within an independent Scotland than the broader and more diverse UK as a whole. Indeed, it is easy to conceive of Scotland as a more agile, manoeuvrable entity than the UK supertanker.

Clearly there are potential positives from independence and that's the sort of sentiment I and other no voters will have to grasp should "yes" win the vote.

Thanks for posting.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I'm not a fan of Irvine Welsh. Have enjoyed at least one of his books but was turned against him primarily by one too many vicious and overly generalised rant about Rangers fans..... 

However, that was an interesting read (eventually - what a preamble!). I actually thought he was going to descend into an anti-English rant at one point, even though he was dealing with an issue that also irritates me. In fact, I only kept reading in the knowledge that you wouldn't have posted such a thing.

I'm glad I did - that's maybe as close as I've read to explaining a broader context for independence without getting lost in short term economic minutiae. Maybe even the first thing that's given me pause to see the potential upside of independence over the status quo.

Despite that, I still think independence is the wrong way to go and would much prefer to see the ills of our society resolved within the UK. Perhaps that's an unrealistic, impractical view; I can understand why many feel it would be quicker and easier to achieve much locally within an independent Scotland than the broader and more diverse UK as a whole. Indeed, it is easy to conceive of Scotland as a more agile, manoeuvrable entity than the UK supertanker.

Clearly there are potential positives from independence and that's the sort of sentiment I and other no voters will have to grasp should "yes" win the vote.

Thanks for posting.
		
Click to expand...

No worries.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 4, 2014)

Solid stuff from that feisty Jean quine countering Andrew Neil


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 4, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Which is surely what would happen over time if the Scottish economy bombed following a YES vote.
		
Click to expand...

No one can know what would happen - people can guess or make estimations 

There are certainly a great deal of other countries that are still suffering and continue to suffer


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 4, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Solid stuff from that feisty Jean quine countering Andrew Neil  

Click to expand...

She has been a real star for the Yes group.
Have you noticed how they are all too scared to interupt her.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Yip, and rates for borrowing in this case would be as bad as using a pay day lender
		
Click to expand...

It appears there are plans now coming to the "surface" about the nukes.


----------



## HughJars (Sep 4, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Yip, and rates for borrowing in this case would be as bad as using a pay day lender
		
Click to expand...

A perfect example of why NO are losing the voters


----------



## Iaing (Sep 4, 2014)

I'll keep this short..
I will vote yes because I believe Scotland's interests will be better served by a Scottish government than by Westminster.

Independence will also mean that Westminster can stop fretting about when the burden that is North Sea oil will run out and start planning for the loss of the revenue immediately.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 4, 2014)

Iaing said:



			I'll keep this short..
I will vote yes because I believe Scotland's interests will be better served by a Scottish government than by Westminster.

Independence will also mean that Westminster can stop fretting about when the burden that is North Sea oil will run out and start planning for the loss of the revenue immediately.
		
Click to expand...

Looking to the future there is I believe 570 oil rigs in the North Sea.
It costs the oil companies a fortune to de-commission them so plenty of work there boys and girls.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 4, 2014)

[video=youtube;pZgu0KichKE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZgu0KichKE[/video]


----------



## HughJars (Sep 4, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Looking to the future there is I believe 570 oil rigs in the North Sea.
It costs the oil companies a fortune to de-commission them so plenty of work there boys and girls.
		
Click to expand...

Another perfect example of why NO are losing voters


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 4, 2014)

(Lord) George Robertson on Scotland 2014 this evening.  I didn't really get his gloom and doom mongering about the impact on UK military capability of Scotland taking it's bit.  Whether a Scottish Defence Force would be sufficiently organised to take part in any NATO or UN military action 'straight away' is one thing.  Suggesting a serious debilitation of the UKs capacity/capability to take part is another - and indeed even if it did whether that would particularly matter in the short term - in time the rUK forces would restored to the strength desired byu Westminster and the rUK MoD.

In any case if absolutely necessary Joint Operability of Scottish and rUK forces would clearly be as straightforward as these things get - and one heck of a lot easier than Joint Ops of the rUK forces with say the French.


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 5, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I genuinely don't understand the hesitancy,but I don't understand why the polls are even remotely close.Use Catalunya as a reasonable comparison.They're just about to have a referendum too and they're looking at 80-90% yes vote.The ability to self determine should be automatic and the resistance to it is totally alien to me.
		
Click to expand...

This for me has always been the one sentiment that should override all others. Its about the desire for TOTAL self determination.

I love the Union, and I do believe it is a partnership that works. Those that spout Scotland doesn't get a fair deal from Westminster are blinkered to the fact that no one gets a fair deal from Westminster. I believe we are better together, and I feel the comment of "well why aren't we better together now" is just pure rubbish. We are the best we could be at this moment in time, during difficult times.

Unfortunately, finance, money, world banks, currency, lending etc are essential to the running of a country. But I feel they cloud the issue of independence. It should about the desire for self determination, end of.

If I was a Scot, living in Scotland, I'd be girding my loins and voting Yes. Courage, self belief and self determination.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 5, 2014)

I disagree, I think London and SE England gets far more than it's fair share from Westminster.

Someone once said if you want to judge wealth count the building cranes.
I believe that more than 90% of the UK's building cranes are currently working within the M25.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Looking to the future there is I believe 570 oil rigs in the North Sea.
It costs the oil companies a fortune to de-commission them so plenty of work there boys and girls.
		
Click to expand...

Does this mean that you agree with the estimates and the oil is running out.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			In any case if absolutely necessary Joint Operability of Scottish and rUK forces would clearly be as straightforward as these things get - and one heck of a lot easier than Joint Ops of the rUK forces with say the French.
		
Click to expand...


How do you work that one out or are you assuming that iscot will automatically buy UK defence equipment.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Looking to the future there is I believe 570 oil rigs in the North Sea.
It costs the oil companies a fortune to de-commission them so plenty of work there boys and girls.
		
Click to expand...

Some interesting links and information regarding this here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-28857939


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I disagree, I think London and SE England gets far more than it's fair share from Westminster.

Someone once said if you want to judge wealth count the building cranes.
I believe that more than 90% of the UK's building cranes are currently working within the M25.
		
Click to expand...

So the whole thing is based on jealousy and the me me me syndrome.  The RUK is in the same boat.  Scotland at least gets a better weather forecast from Carol than the rest of us.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			So the whole thing is based on jealousy and the me me me syndrome.  The RUK is in the same boat.  Scotland at least gets a better weather forecast from Carol than the rest of us.

Click to expand...

Not jealousy, more equality/fairness.
HS2 is a very good example of getting it totally wrong.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not jealousy, more equality/fairness.
*HS2 is a very good example of getting it totally wrong.*

Click to expand...

H'mm. Not convinced (either way) on that, but believe that, without 'better' transport links, UK's development will be seriously restricted. And I'm a believer in more efficient Railways rather than more congested Roads. But HS2 provides absolutely zero benefit for Scotland!


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			H'mm. Not convinced (either way) on that, but believe that, without 'better' transport links, UK's development will be seriously restricted. And I'm a believer in more efficient Railways rather than more congested Roads. But HS2 provides absolutely zero benefit for Scotland!
		
Click to expand...

Nor the West Country nor Wales so because it's no good for Scotland it shouldn't happen.  I'm not keen on the project either but that's life, you win some and you lose many.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Nor the West Country nor Wales so because it's no good for Scotland it shouldn't happen.  I'm not keen on the project either but that's life, you win some and you lose many.
		
Click to expand...

Regional Assemblies for the other four English regions. NW.NE,Midlands & SW[SE already has a big one] is the answer.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Regional Assemblies for the other four English regions. NW.NE,Midlands & SW[SE already has a big one] is the answer.
		
Click to expand...

NE already rejected the idea, Wales being a team player didn't want Indepenence and voted against it and only narrowly got an assembly, SW full of Scots so they will go for Indepenence and the NW don't normally bother to get of their bums to vote. I would worry about which way the midlands go.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			How do you work that one out or are you assuming that iscot will automatically buy UK defence equipment.
		
Click to expand...

For a start they will be using the same equipment - and subsequently it would make sense to buy equipment that is inter-operable with what the rUK use - maybe also with the rUK MOD jointly fund development and procurement with of equipment  Unless the rUK imposes a defence sales embargo on Scotland companies such BAESystems will I'm sure be more than happy to sell to Scotland.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			So the whole thing is based on jealousy and the me me me syndrome.  *The RUK is in the same boat*.  Scotland at least gets a better weather forecast from Carol than the rest of us.

Click to expand...

Which is unfortunate for the rUK.  Two weeks today we'll know the choice Scotland has made.  I have to wait until next year to make my choice - and unfortunately I suspect I won't get what I vote for.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			For a start they will be using the same equipment - and subsequently it would make sense to buy equipment that is inter-operable with what the rUK use - maybe also with the rUK MOD jointly fund development and procurement with of equipment  Unless the rUK imposes a defence sales embargo on Scotland companies such BAESystems will I'm sure be more than happy to sell to Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Why will they be using the same kit.  The British Forces plan in advance for their requirements (not very well) and their plan would not have included having to give it away.   I suppose they could lease it to an iscot while they get some sort of plan.  Ohh but there not very good at detail so that might take a while.

Have iscot said what kind of defence force they require.

I presume that if they decide to have a force they will do a procurment exercise and buy what they can afford in line with the equipment they feel they need for there forces,


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Regional Assemblies for the other four English regions. NW.NE,Midlands & SW[SE already has a big one] is the answer.
		
Click to expand...

How is that going to help with issues like HS2 though! That's where an overall body acting, supposedly, in the interests of the entire Country/Union (ie the Government) is the one that should be making the decisions. Regional Assemblies merely add an unnecessary level (or many more!) of bureaucracy imo. Different - more justifiable - where it's an actual Country involved though.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Which is unfortunate for the rUK.  Two weeks today we'll know the choice Scotland has made.  I have to wait until next year to make my choice - and unfortunately I suspect I won't get what I vote for.
		
Click to expand...

Sounds like you may be better off moving if the Yes get in then although, and obviously I have no way of proving it, your true blue at heart or you wouldnt have stayed.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			How is that going to help with issues like HS2 though! That's where an overall body acting, supposedly, in the interests of the entire Country/Union (ie the Government) is the one that should be making the decisions. Regional Assemblies merely add an unnecessary level (or many more!) of bureaucracy imo. Different - more justifiable - where it's an actual Country involved though.
		
Click to expand...

And huge levels of extra cost.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Sounds like you may be better off moving if the Yes get in then although, and obviously I have no way of proving it, your true blue at heart or you wouldnt have stayed.
		
Click to expand...

I might well be - unfortunately the decision is not mine.


----------



## Val (Sep 5, 2014)

HughJars said:



			A perfect example of why NO are losing the voters
		
Click to expand...

Why would that be? Higher interest rates without a currency union is a major negative to voting YES


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			NE already rejected the idea, Wales being a team player didn't want Indepenence and voted against it and only narrowly got an assembly, SW full of Scots so they will go for Indepenence and the NW don't normally bother to get of their bums to vote. I would worry about which way the midlands go.
		
Click to expand...

I can see a future when the Northern counties may wish to join Scotland.


----------



## the smiling assassin (Sep 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I can see a future when the Northern counties may wish to join Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

time for another jacobite uprising?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 5, 2014)

the smiling assassin said:



			time for another jacobite uprising?
		
Click to expand...

Not quite, it will be voluntary this time.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 5, 2014)

Can someone explain why the likes New Zealand who have a smaller population than Scotland and have their own currency,  manage to work hand in hand with Australia their nearest neighbour and biggest export market with no problems. ?

And how does the Isle of Mann manage to work with the UK when it has its own government and still uses the Pound ?.

 Genuine questions .


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 5, 2014)

[video]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z9V7LK87Jhw[/video]

We've got the triple!


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 5, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Can someone explain why the likes New Zealand who have a smaller population than Scotland and have their own currency,  manage to work hand in hand with Australia their nearest neighbour and biggest export market with no problems. ?

And how does the Isle of Mann manage to work with the UK when it has its own government and still uses the Pound ?.

 Genuine questions .
		
Click to expand...

Both of those countries have been doing so for a long time.

It will only be the transitional period that will cause problems. But the Yes team have deliberately - and very sensibly imo - not made concrete proposals on how the transition would be made. There will be a Plan B (and C) somewhere, but it's much simpler and a more convincing argument to simply call the bluff and say Plan A will happen!

I know NZ has a 'Free Trade' agreement with Australia - and with several other, mainly Asian, countries.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 5, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			And how does the Isle of Mann manage to work with the UK when it has its own government and still uses the Pound ?.

 Genuine questions .
		
Click to expand...

Same principles as Welsh football teams play in the English Leagues.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 5, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			How is that going to help with issues like HS2 though! That's where an overall body acting, supposedly, in the interests of the entire Country/Union (ie the Government) is the one that should be making the decisions. Regional Assemblies merely add an unnecessary level (or many more!) of bureaucracy imo. Different - more justifiable - where it's an actual Country involved though.
		
Click to expand...

Quite simple really the regional assemblies instruct a much smaller National Government [ second tier if you like]what is best for the country.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I can see a future when the Northern counties may wish to join Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

You drinking your best export today.


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I can see a future when the Northern counties may wish to join Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Nurse, NURSE!! He's missed his meds again.

Sorry but I think Salmond, and the SNP, are way too far left for me. I like some of the things they've done on a social level but his "qualified admiration of Putin..." yuk!


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

Seems the SNP wanted the bedroom tax after all 
http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/snp-slammed-over-mps-no-show-at-bedroom-tax-vote-1-3532875


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

Membership of NATO could be a problem. At last some information http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...neral-sir-richard-shirreff-s-letter-1-3526265


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Seems the SNP wanted the bedroom tax after all 
http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/snp-slammed-over-mps-no-show-at-bedroom-tax-vote-1-3532875

Click to expand...

If the vote is yes, the SNP might only be in power till the next election .


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			If the vote is yes, the SNP might only be in power till the next election .
		
Click to expand...

As covert Tory supporters you could be right.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 5, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			If the vote is yes, the SNP might only be in power till the next election .
		
Click to expand...

A fact that many outside of Scotland seem incapable of understanding.

I loved the comment from the English guy on the Radio this morning.

'If that is what Scotland want [independence] I think we should give it to them'.................

Gee thanks Guv very generous of you.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Membership of NATO could be a problem. At last some information http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...neral-sir-richard-shirreff-s-letter-1-3526265

Click to expand...

Did you see Lord Robertson's recent interview, quite amusing, he started off by giving the dictionary definition of cataclysmic.

Now that is scaremongering of the highest order.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Did you see Lord Robertson's recent interview, quite amusing, he started off by giving the dictionary definition of cataclysmic.

Now that is scaremongering of the highest order.
		
Click to expand...

The good General is not scaremongering, he's just telling it as it is.  Sorry, I know the Yes boys arnt keen on facts but that's how it is.

No NATO
No EU, but it appears the Yes on here think like some of the RUK on that one.
No aligned pound


----------



## Iaing (Sep 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Membership of NATO could be a problem. At last some information http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...neral-sir-richard-shirreff-s-letter-1-3526265

Click to expand...

Or perhaps not..From a more recent edition of the same paper..

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...-independence-scots-welcome-in-nato-1-3529122


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

Iaing said:



			Or perhaps not..From a more recent edition of the same paper..

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...-independence-scots-welcome-in-nato-1-3529122

Click to expand...

You believe what you want, I believe what I want. That's the way of the world.


----------



## Iaing (Sep 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			You believe what you want, I believe what I want. That's the way of the world.
		
Click to expand...

But I'm voting and you ain't. :clap:


----------



## power fade (Sep 5, 2014)

Iaing said:



			But I'm voting and you ain't. :clap:
		
Click to expand...

It's a No for me buddy.  Not convinced on how these promises will be paid for - but each to their own


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 5, 2014)

Iaing said:



			But I'm voting and you ain't. :clap:
		
Click to expand...

True, but I'm a team player and your not.


----------



## Iaing (Sep 5, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			True, but I'm a team player and your not.
		
Click to expand...

Bull.
And it's you're.


----------



## Iaing (Sep 5, 2014)

power fade said:



			It's a No for me buddy.  Not convinced on how these promises will be paid for - but each to their own
		
Click to expand...

Thought it might be Davie. &#128521;


----------



## power fade (Sep 5, 2014)

Iaing said:



			Thought it might be Davie. &#128521;
		
Click to expand...

Davie?

Yes voters are starting to piss me off, always in yer face and not allowing anyone an opinion that differs from them


----------



## Iaing (Sep 5, 2014)

power fade said:



			Davie?

Yes voters are starting to piss me off, always in yer face and not allowing anyone an opinion that differs from them
		
Click to expand...

Sincere apologies, it was a case of mistaken identity. I thought you were a friend of mine who uses the same username on another golf forum.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 5, 2014)

Iaing said:



			Sincere apologies, it was a case of mistaken identity. I thought you were a friend of mine who uses the same username on another golf forum.
		
Click to expand...

You have a friend :rofl: ONLY JOKING YOU'RE NOT A BAD LAD :thup:


----------



## power fade (Sep 5, 2014)

Iaing said:



			Sincere apologies, it was a case of mistaken identity. I thought you were a friend of mine who uses the same username on another golf forum.
		
Click to expand...

crossed wires here Ian. 

I Am not Davie, no idea who he is either


----------



## Iaing (Sep 5, 2014)

power fade said:



			crossed wires here Ian. 

I Am not Davie, no idea who he is either
		
Click to expand...

Bigslice on here.


----------



## power fade (Sep 5, 2014)

Iaing said:



			Bigslice on here.
		
Click to expand...

big difference between a slice and a power fade...lol


----------



## Val (Sep 6, 2014)

power fade said:



			big difference between a slice and a power fade...lol
		
Click to expand...

Try telling him that :rofl:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 6, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Membership of NATO could be a problem. At last some information http://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...neral-sir-richard-shirreff-s-letter-1-3526265

Click to expand...

I laugh at folk who qualify themselves and their love of a country due to their roots, like the Americans who tell you they're Scottish as they're family are from Edinboro...kinda like Trump.Well this guys opening paragraph did exactly that.

Why bother with the qualification?And since when are serving senior officers allowed to make political comment?

The NO lot are seriously worried.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 6, 2014)

power fade said:



			Davie?

Yes voters are starting to piss me off, always in yer face and not allowing anyone an opinion that differs from them
		
Click to expand...

Not allowing?Settle pettle.


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 6, 2014)

Currency union, or not, is the main issue for me


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 6, 2014)

SAPCOR1 said:



			Currency union, or not, is the main issue for me
		
Click to expand...

If you want an answer to that, watch how much the Â£ devalues in the next few days.


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If you want an answer to that, watch how much the Â£ devalues in the next few days.
		
Click to expand...

Whatever that may be it won't be worse than an independent Scottish Â£ or one linked to the Euro


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 6, 2014)

SAPCOR1 said:



			Whatever that may be it won't be worse than an independent Scottish Â£ or one linked to the Euro
		
Click to expand...

http://www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/scottish-independence-uk-dependency.

The Three Amegios handiwork there for all to see.
They may think they are playing hardball but they must realise the consequences of their actions.


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/scottish-independence-uk-dependency.

The Three Amegios handiwork there for all to see.
They may think they are playing hardball but they must realise the consequences of their actions.
		
Click to expand...

One point of view taken from a section of one report.  Even "oil rich" Norway has to pay higher Bond rates due the population size so Scotland will have to do also.

Of course the rest of the UK will be better with Scotland as will Scotland be better with the rest of the UK.


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/scottish-independence-uk-dependency.

The Three Amegios handiwork there for all to see.
They may think they are playing hardball but they must realise the consequences of their actions.
		
Click to expand...

Well I've read it and reread it, and I still haven't got a clue what rollox you're talking. What three Amigos are these then?

Do you suffer acute paranoia? Is there someone behind you? Bet you see reds under the bed too.

As for hard ball, Salmond with his arrogant bully boy tactics of give us a currency union or else! Give yourself a good shake.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 6, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/scottish-independence-uk-dependency.

The Three Amegios handiwork there for all to see.
They may think they are playing hardball but they must realise the consequences of their actions.
		
Click to expand...

So we quote from left wing blogs now and hope everyone agrees.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 6, 2014)

Big swing in momentum this last week or so...

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/09/06/latest-scottish-referendum-poll-yes-lead/


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 7, 2014)

Yes vote boosted by Milliband's 2016 election campaign visit to Scotland.

The just don't get it do they!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 7, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			So we quote from left wing blogs now and hope everyone agrees.
		
Click to expand...

Goodness has the FT and Barclays gone left wing now.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Goodness has the FT and Barclays gone left wing now.
		
Click to expand...

As its a blog and not done by FT or Barclays I doubt it.  My suggestion was that the Blogger was left wing.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 7, 2014)

Here we go again, Euro 2016 qualifiers-  Germany v Scotland on Pay TV Sky Sports 5 . Switzerland v England free on ITV.

I'm thinking of voting yes just to get our own TV channel.


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 7, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Here we go again, Euro 2016 qualifiers-  Germany v Scotland on Pay TV Sky Sports 5 . Switzerland v England free on ITV.

I'm thinking of voting yes just to get our own TV channel. 

Click to expand...

We have! The joy that is STV......


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 7, 2014)

SAPCOR1 said:



			We have! The joy that is STV......
		
Click to expand...

Exactly !! they should be showing OUR game.


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 7, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Exactly !! they should be showing OUR game.
		
Click to expand...

I'm glad it's on Sky to be honest and they employ more people here than STV and BBC Scotland do


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 7, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Exactly !! they should be showing OUR game.
		
Click to expand...

So the Yes vote is swayed by what kissball match is on the TV as well.


----------



## JustOne (Sep 7, 2014)

I reckon an annual pass of circa Â£299 should be fine.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 7, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			So the Yes vote is swayed by what kissball match is on the TV as well. 

Click to expand...

Could be the last straw ,


----------



## Crow (Sep 7, 2014)

Iâ€™m finding myself surprised by how emotionally involved Iâ€™ve recently become in the independence vote. 

The people of Scotland will probably not give a fig about my thoughts, only the whole thing feels like two fingers to the rest of the Union to me. It pains me to say this but I find myself irrationally disliking anything Scottish, which Iâ€™m embarrassed to have to admit feels like racism. 

If a Yes vote goes through then I fear that my attitude to Scotland, a country and people Iâ€™ve always liked, will change and I wonâ€™t give a stuff about what happens to it or them from that day on.

Iâ€™m not big on politics but I think that the Union works pretty well, probably more so for Scotland with its own active parliament than for anybody else. 

People of Scotland, I ask you to vote No to independence!


----------



## DCB (Sep 7, 2014)

Crow said:



			Iâ€™m finding myself surprised by how emotionally involved Iâ€™ve recently become in the independence vote.
		
Click to expand...

I see this as the biggest issue in this whole process. Emotion should have no part in it, it's down to hard facts and figures, that's what has to be taken into account. People are going to vote with their hearts rather than their heads. That's not the way for the future of a country to be decided.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 7, 2014)

I'm not convinced that the particular channel screening Scotland football matches is a constitutional issue....

Mind you, neither are the vast majority of issues being debated so wire in!


----------



## chrisd (Sep 7, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Germany v Scotland on Pay TV Sky Sports 5 .
		
Click to expand...


Probably worth paying not to watch!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 7, 2014)

I see Gideon, with all the style of Del Boy, is rushing through now devolution sweeties.

NO credibility is now in shreds.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 7, 2014)

Total arrogance.....does he not know that people have already voted.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29099431


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 7, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Could be the last straw ,

Click to expand...

You really don't want to be watching it.


----------



## scottbrown (Sep 7, 2014)

I have to say, after reading that the Scots will get more powers if they vote No, I personally hope that they do vote yes. How can a union work when each country can have completely different rules and the people get benefits of that, I already hate the fact of free prescriptions etc ( jealousy maybe ) 
But I guess, you want independent power - be independent.


----------



## WeekendHacker (Sep 7, 2014)

Part of me wants them to vote yes and see them realise it's not the golden ticket they think it is. People getting carried away by braveheart style speeches and forgetting about practicalities. Bear in mind whatever happens...if it's as close as the polls say, about half the country won't want the change, and it's a pretty massive change.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 7, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			You really don't want to be watching it.
		
Click to expand...

We're doing better than Brazil.....


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 7, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			We're doing better than Brazil..... 

Click to expand...

Great game for the neutrals


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 7, 2014)

scottbrown said:



			I have to say, after reading that the Scots will get more powers if they vote No, I personally hope that they do vote yes. How can a union work when each country can have completely different rules and the people get benefits of that, I already hate the fact of free prescriptions etc ( jealousy maybe ) 
But I guess, you want independent power - be independent.
		
Click to expand...

Jealousy and ignorance, I'm afraid. We don't get extra money for free prescriptions but the politicians have decided the policy (a blatant bribe and part of the snp's long term plan to con the Scottish people). This means we have less money for other priorities.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 7, 2014)

I have a question for both Yes and No camps. 

I'm far from Scottish of having the most up to date information on the debate, but perhaps those in the know could hear me out and give a view based on what I say?

Before all the posturing, debates, speeches and so on, right at the beginning when the referendum was very first announced, how many thought it actually possible?

My reason for asking is the majority of folk on here at the time the referendum was announced saw Devo-Max as the real prize. 

I wonder if Salmond thought the same?

I wonder if he thought to himself that the threat of independence would be sufficient in strong arming Westminster into full devolution of power?

It would explain why he has been so vague on such key subjects throughout the entire debate, especially currency, with no, announced or obvious plan B being uttered.

Now that the polls are moving in the Yes direction, I wonder if more pressure from the people actually voting Yes, to hear more about what will happen post independence, will cause him to give a little ore detail on the possible contingencies planned should his Plan A fail?

As I say,I have no vested interest either way, I'm just curious as to what the people this actually means something to think.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 7, 2014)

WeekendHacker said:



			Part of me wants them to vote yes and see them realise it's not the golden ticket they think it is. People getting carried away by braveheart style speeches and forgetting about practicalities. Bear in mind whatever happens...if it's as close as the polls say, about half the country won't want the change, and it's a pretty massive change.
		
Click to expand...

Our politicians found out that it cost more to administer paid prescriptions than to make them free.
Is that the kind of practicality to which you refer.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Our politicians found out that it cost more to administer paid prescriptions than to make them free.
Is that the kind of practicality to which you refer.
		
Click to expand...

No they didn't, they new it was a vote winner and as has been said by others who live in Scotland, gave that part of the budget more and cut it somewhere else.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 7, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			No they didn't, they new it was a vote winner and as has been said by others who live in Scotland, gave that part of the budget more and cut it somewhere else.
		
Click to expand...

If my memory serves me right I think they found out that after you take out the young, elderly, poor, pregnant and invalids it left only about 7% of people who were required to pay.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 7, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			You really don't want to be watching it.
		
Click to expand...

Oh yes i do


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 7, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Oh yes i do
		
Click to expand...

Yep you do. Now get another one


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 7, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Yep you do. Now get another one
		
Click to expand...

Darn - but pretty good I thought. Total **** of a ref

Saw a YES saltire.  I wonder if UEFA will fine Scotland for a fan flying a political flag - like St Johnstone were fined last week for a fan waving a Palestine flag at our last European home game - â‚¬18000.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 7, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Yep you do. Now get another one
		
Click to expand...

Almost , but we got one stretchered off. Ref was terrible.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 7, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Almost , but we got one stretchered off. Ref was terrible.
		
Click to expand...

Usual smug homer of a ref when referring a big team.  Smiling condescendingly at the protestations of a wee team.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Smiling condescendingly at the protestations of a wee team.
		
Click to expand...

Glad a Scot said that be it an English one.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 7, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Glad a Scot said that be it an English one.
		
Click to expand...

The 'wee' would be in the eyes of the referee and not this viewer.  And what do you mean by 'an English one'.  ME an English Scot? Huh!  I shall restrain myself.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 8, 2014)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...e-mortgage-meltdown-if-Yes-campaign-wins.html


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 8, 2014)

Crow said:



			Iâ€™m finding myself surprised by how emotionally involved Iâ€™ve recently become in the independence vote. 

The people of Scotland will probably not give a fig about my thoughts, only the whole thing feels like two fingers to the rest of the Union to me. It pains me to say this but I find myself irrationally disliking anything Scottish, which Iâ€™m embarrassed to have to admit feels like racism. 

If a Yes vote goes through then I fear that my attitude to Scotland, a country and people Iâ€™ve always liked, will change and I wonâ€™t give a stuff about what happens to it or them from that day on.

Iâ€™m not big on politics but I think that the Union works pretty well, probably more so for Scotland with its own active parliament than for anybody else. 

People of Scotland, I ask you to vote No to independence!
		
Click to expand...

Dear Scotland, I don't like coming to terms with own irrational dislike of you and my mild xenophobia and racism, so to avoid me having to accept my own failings as a decent person, vote No, there's a good chaps.

regards,

A.Daftie


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 8, 2014)

CMAC said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...e-mortgage-meltdown-if-Yes-campaign-wins.html

Click to expand...

I've just skim read that but I get the gist.So my question is this:

Why would, Santander as an example, who have given me a mortgage for Â£50K ( sterling) alter the terms of that whether that be the rate ( exceptional rate rises, not ones by BoE) the currency or the timescale?Even if Scotland set up it's own currency and central bank.My mortgage is for Â£50K sterling.

The next one will be gas/electricity bills rising...can someone explain that one too?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Darn - but pretty good I thought. Total **** of a ref

Saw a YES saltire.  I wonder if UEFA will fine Scotland for a fan flying a political flag - like St Johnstone were fined last week for a fan waving a Palestine flag at our last European home game - â‚¬18000.
		
Click to expand...

I should have said.  Total numbskull of a ref.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've just skim read that but I get the gist.So my question is this:

Why would, Santander as an example, who have given me a mortgage for Â£50K ( sterling) alter the terms of that whether that be the rate ( exceptional rate rises, not ones by BoE) the currency or the timescale?Even if Scotland set up it's own currency and central bank.My mortgage is for Â£50K sterling.

The next one will be gas/electricity bills rising...can someone explain that one too?
		
Click to expand...

As I understand what I read, it's more along the lines of a new Scottish currency and conversion rates, post yes, as Westminster has outlined no currency union.




			Adopting a policy of â€œsterlingisationâ€, whereby the Scots would keep the pound without a formal currency union, is unlikely and furthermore would prevent Edinburgh from joining the European Union. 


Scotland would possibly have to create an entirely new currency, which would present a potentially nightmare scenario for anyone living north of the River Tweed with a mortgage that is denominated in sterling.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 8, 2014)

Gareth said:



			As I understand what I read, it's more along the lines of a new Scottish currency, post yes, as Westminster has outlined no currency union.
		
Click to expand...

Kinda what I interpreted. I fail to understand the nightmare.Lets create a scenario.

Scotland has it's own currency, lets call it the bawbag and the scrote, it's value is 80% of the Â£, so Â£1 = 80 bawbags.

My mortgage was taken out 10 years ago with Halifax and I've got Â£50K left, or 40K bawbags.Each month I used to pay Â£200 but now I pay 160 bawbags.The Halifax, to make it easier and to ensure they keep my business, are quite happy to  show on my statement the d/d in either currency.I fail to see where the issue lies.I understand why the potential issue is being created by a frenzied and deeplu worried union at Westminster, it looks like me just be about to walk away.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 8, 2014)

Gareth said:



			I have a question for both Yes and No camps. 

I'm far from Scottish of having the most up to date information on the debate, but perhaps those in the know could hear me out and give a view based on what I say?

Before all the posturing, debates, speeches and so on, right at the beginning when the referendum was very first announced, how many thought it actually possible?

My reason for asking is the majority of folk on here at the time the referendum was announced saw Devo-Max as the real prize. 

I wonder if Salmond thought the same?

I wonder if he thought to himself that the threat of independence would be sufficient in strong arming Westminster into full devolution of power?

It would explain why he has been so vague on such key subjects throughout the entire debate, especially currency, with no, announced or obvious plan B being uttered.

Now that the polls are moving in the Yes direction, I wonder if more pressure from the people actually voting Yes, to hear more about what will happen post independence, will cause him to give a little ore detail on the possible contingencies planned should his Plan A fail?

As I say,I have no vested interest either way, I'm just curious as to what the people this actually means something to think.
		
Click to expand...

Salmond has always wanted independence, and from what I understand, didn't think he's get it this time round.But the movement of the yes side and the grass route mobilisation has been nothing short of spectacular.BT have been terrible on the ground and on social media, truely dreadful.YES have trounced them in a way only a few would think possible.

Salmond would have taken Devo max on the card in a heart beat but Cameron refused, it look slike it could be the worst choice Cameron has ever made.Presiding over the end of the union.


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Kinda what I interpreted. I fail to understand the nightmare.Lets create a scenario.

Scotland has it's own currency, lets call it the bawbag and the scrote, it's value is 80% of the Â£, so Â£1 = 80 bawbags.

My mortgage was taken out 10 years ago with Halifax and I've got Â£50K left, or 40K bawbags.Each month I used to pay Â£200 but now I pay 160 bawbags.The Halifax, to make it easier and to ensure they keep my business, are quite happy to  show on my statement the d/d in either currency.I fail to see where the issue lies.I understand why the potential issue is being created by a frenzied and deeplu worried union at Westminster, it looks like me just be about to walk away.
		
Click to expand...

You got that the wrong way round, it would be 60k bawbags


----------



## One Planer (Sep 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Kinda what I interpreted. I fail to understand the nightmare.Lets create a scenario.

Scotland has it's own currency, lets call it the bawbag and the scrote, it's value is 80% of the Â£, so Â£1 = 80 bawbags.

My mortgage was taken out 10 years ago with Halifax and I've got Â£50K left, or 40K bawbags.Each month I used to pay Â£200 but now I pay 160 bawbags.The Halifax, to make it easier and to ensure they keep my business, are quite happy to  show on my statement the d/d in either currency.I fail to see where the issue lies.I understand why the potential issue is being created by a frenzied and deeplu worried union at Westminster, it looks like me just be about to walk away.
		
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be the other way around?

I doubt very much a new currency would trade stronger than the Sterling, Euro and dollar?

If you have, say Â£50,000 mortgage, your new currency isn't going to be stronger than Sterling and I would doubt stronger the â‚¬ and $, especially with it being a new.

If the â‚¬ sits at 1.3 against Sterling with the $ at 1.7, lets say your currency, being generous sits at 1.8 against the pound, your Â£50,000 sterling mortgage just became Â£90000 when converted from BB to Â£Sterling.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 8, 2014)

SAPCOR1 said:



			You got that the wrong way round, it would be 60k bawbags
		
Click to expand...


Aye, apologies.The question is still valid, where is the issue? I pay folk in Euros occasionally, I tell them I'm paying the Â£x then transfer the cash to them via bacs and it arrives in their account in Spain the Euro.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Aye, apologies.The question is still valid, where is the issue? I pay folk in Euros occasionally, I tell them I'm paying the Â£x then transfer the cash to them via bacs and it arrives in their account in Spain the Euro.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm not grasping the subtlety of your point here but you pay an exchange rate and possibly bank charges on such a transaction? Hence it costs you more.....


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 8, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Maybe I'm not grasping the subtlety of your point here but you pay an exchange rate and possibly bank charges on such a transaction? Hence it costs you more.....
		
Click to expand...

possibly.But possibly not.How many folk in Scotland have mortgages with Halifax?Lets say 100,000 (it'll be more) Halifax are going to put those accounts at risk by putting charges on transactions? Someone else will just offer to do it without them and Halifax will be goosed.I fail to see the issue.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 8, 2014)

That issue is simply sorted by *initially* pegging the 'new' Scottish to Sterling at a rate of 1:1 - without float! It's only when there is a floating currency that there are exchange rate risks between the two.

As part of transition, Banks/Mortgage Holders would be required to move the debt into Scotland, so no 'Foreign Currency' Mortgage.

And all the above would only be required if 'Currency Union' was rejected. And the above administration hassle is one of the arguments for Currency Union - at least initially.

I believe an Independent Scotland will/would, eventually, have its own currency though.


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Aye, apologies.The question is still valid, where is the issue? I pay folk in Euros occasionally, I tell them I'm paying the Â£x then transfer the cash to them via bacs and it arrives in their account in Spain the Euro.
		
Click to expand...


If the Scottish currency is valued at 80% of Sterling, as the Euro currently is, then overnight you will lose 20% from the value of your assets.

Transferring money currently you get the current Sterling to Euro exchange rate but if the Scottish Â£ is worth the same as the Euro in the future then you will get a like for like amount.

Eg: Currently Â£1.00 = â‚¬1.20.  Potential future SCÂ£1.00 =â‚¬1.00

(Ps: Bacs is for UK only, SEPA payments for Euro zone)


----------



## One Planer (Sep 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			possibly.But possibly not.How many folk in Scotland have mortgages with Halifax?Lets say 100,000 (it'll be more) Halifax are going to put those accounts at risk by putting charges on transactions? Someone else will just offer to do it without them and Halifax will be goosed.I fail to see the issue.
		
Click to expand...

But would they?

I have a HBOS mortgage. Does that mean post independence I would potentially have the same issue making payments to a Scottish bank?

Or in a better case scenario. I have Â£24000 sterling left to pay on my mortgage, but I would be paying Bank of Scotland (HBOS), does that mean I then pay in your new currency and my mortgage is vastly reduced due to currency differences?


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 8, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I should have said.  Total numbskull of a ref.
		
Click to expand...

I agree he definitely wasn't 4 star.:thup:


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 8, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			I agree he definitely wasn't 4 star.:thup:
		
Click to expand...

Salmond has released a statement promising a higher standard of refereeing in an independent Scotland. And a team that will always qualify for major finals once we have full use of our oil revenues to fund a playing field on every street and free new boots for every child...

Better together claim that an independent Scotland, with its players unable to participate in the "best league in the world", the EPL, (work permit issues due to being an non-EU country) will never play in a major finals again.....


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 8, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Salmond has released a statement promising a higher standard of refereeing in an independent Scotland. And a team that will always qualify for major finals once we have full use of our oil revenues to fund a playing field on every street and free new boots for every child...

Better together claim that an independent Scotland, with it's players unable to participate in the "best league in the world", the EPL, (work permit issues due to being an non-EU country) will never play in a major finals again.....
		
Click to expand...

I'll need to consider that very carefully


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Kinda what I interpreted. I fail to understand the nightmare.Lets create a scenario.

Scotland has it's own currency, lets call it the bawbag and the scrote, it's value is 80% of the Â£, so Â£1 = 80 bawbags.

My mortgage was taken out 10 years ago with Halifax and I've got Â£50K left, or 40K bawbags.Each month I used to pay Â£200 but now I pay 160 bawbags.The Halifax, to make it easier and to ensure they keep my business, are quite happy to  show on my statement the d/d in either currency.I fail to see where the issue lies.I understand why the potential issue is being created by a frenzied and deeplu worried union at Westminster, it looks like me just be about to walk away.
		
Click to expand...

My projects are all budgeted and costs forecast in â‚¬s.  My time is charged in Â£s.  I use Dutch, German, Spanish, Polish, Romanian, US and Indian resource on my projects.  A multitude of currencies. It's no big deal.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

22nd January this thread was started and we've been debating the subject pretty solidly ever since.  And almost from the start the likes of A2D and DfT forecast a narrowing of the the polls as referendum day approached - as that is what Salmond and the SNP are brilliant at doing.  And so it has come to pass.  Yet the English MSM are today acting as if this closing of the gap was something completely startling and unexpected - coming to them quite out of the blue. Ah well.  At least England seems now to have truly woken up to what might happen a week on Thursday.


----------



## chrisd (Sep 8, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			22nd January this thread was started and we've been debating the subject pretty solidly ever since.  And almost from the start the likes of A2D and DfT forecast a narrowing of the the polls as referendum day approached - as that is what Salmond and the SNP are brilliant at doing.  And so it has come to pass.  Yet the English MSM are today acting as if this closing of the gap was something completely startling and unexpected - coming to them quite out of the blue. Ah well.  At least England seems now to have truly woken up to what might happen a week on Thursday.
		
Click to expand...

4,000 + plus posts later, and I have to ask the question.

Do you think "England" is remotely interested in the vote or it's eventual outcome?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

chrisd said:



			4,000 + plus posts later, and I have to ask the question.

Do you think "England" is remotely interested in the vote or it's eventual outcome?
		
Click to expand...

Well it should be - not for anything to do with Scotland as such - but should be getting answers to questions about what next for the rUK post a YES - and also what next if a NO on the back of a load of promises from Gideon and Co.   Maybe us folks of EWANI are happy just to wait and see.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 8, 2014)

Re mortgages.
With average house prices in Central London Â£1.6m and Â£500,000 in Greater London how does mortgage repayments square up to an average of Â£160,000 for Scotland and Â£126,000 for Glasgow.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Re mortgages.
With average house prices in Central London Â£1.6m and Â£500,000 in Greater London how does mortgage repayments square up to an average of Â£160,000 for Scotland and Â£126,000 for Glasgow.
		
Click to expand...

London is effectively a city state - with metropolitan area population of 13m and growing - so way bigger than Scotland, Wales and NI lumped together.  Greater London 10m (2014)


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 8, 2014)

chrisd said:



			4,000 + plus posts later, and I have to ask the question.

Do you think "England" is remotely interested in the vote or it's eventual outcome?
		
Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...and-love-bombing-scotland-no-vote-westminster


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

Speaking with my mother earlier it sounds like my pretty large extended family from all across Scotland are largely in the YES.  We are a highlands and islands family stretching from cousins in Orkney, Ullapool and Inverness to Tiree and Islay plus sister and husband in Arran.  My brother in Aberdeen and at least some of his mates in the oil and civil engineering industry (my brother is pretty senior guy used to work for Wood group) are also YES.  Other Aberdeenshire cousins are YES.  My Fife relatives are undecided/NO.  And my mum is YES - but her neighbours are largely NO.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 8, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Speaking with my mother earlier it sounds like my pretty large extended family from all across Scotland are largely in the YES.  We are a highlands and islands family stretching from cousins in Orkney, Ullapool and Inverness to Tiree and Islay plus sister and husband in Arran.  My brother in Aberdeen and at least some of his mates in the oil and civil engineering industry (my brother is pretty senior guy used to work for Wood group) are also YES.  Other Aberdeenshire cousins are YES.  My Fife relatives are undecided/NO.  And my mum is YES - but her neighbours are largely NO.
		
Click to expand...

I met these guys in the pub, they have hundreds of relatives living far and wide in Scotland, they are all voting No. :blah:


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 8, 2014)

in most cases I've found it depends on who you are asking. Ive just come back from a few days a way with a the group of guys all of which all are either: Lawyers, Doctors and Retired Bankers and a Judge all are No Voters.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 8, 2014)

Seems like the markets have started to give their verdict.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I met these guys in the pub, they have hundreds of relatives living far and wide in Scotland, they are all voting No. :blah:
		
Click to expand...

You wouldn't have met them all in the :cheers: - some are Wee Frees :ears:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Seems like the markets have started to give their verdict.
		
Click to expand...

A verdict on the Westminster stance on CU? Maybe the markets don't believe what Gideon and Co are saying and given a YES looks a possibility they want G&C to come clean.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			in most cases I've found it depends on who you are asking. Ive just come back from a few days a way with a the group of guys all of which all are either: Lawyers, Doctors and Retired Bankers and a Judge all are No Voters.
		
Click to expand...

tbh - I would have put quite a few of my relatives in the NO camp.  Maybe they still are.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 8, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			in most cases I've found it depends on who you are asking. Ive just come back from a few days a way with a the group of guys all of which all are either: Lawyers, Doctors and Retired Bankers and a Judge all are No Voters.
		
Click to expand...

Not surprising as they have more to lose , but the people on the bread line have nothing to lose and there seems to be more of them, I'm afraid.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 8, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			A verdict on the Westminster stance on CU? Maybe the markets don't believe what Gideon and Co are saying and given a YES looks a possibility they want G&C to come clean.
		
Click to expand...

No, if you look closely you will see there has been a major hit on Scottish company shares. It even made the news. It seems the whole thing has suddenly become newsworthy on the BBC.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 8, 2014)

From what I can see in Ayrshire the YES voters seem to form a broad church.
In my circle of Yes friends there are accountants, civil servants, bankers, forestry workers, farmers, council workers and OAP's. They tend to be quiet.
My No friends include business men/women, hoteliers, shop keepers, OAP's and factory workers. They tend to be in your face loud.

It is interesting that the one group that YES seem to be failing to attract is the 16-18 year old's. The group that many on here thought were locked on Yes voters

I have asked my four grandchildren how I should vote.
All four, 5 to 12 years old, have said No as they don't want things to change.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 8, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Not surprising as they have more to lose , but the people on the bread line have nothing to lose and there seems to be more of them, I'm afraid.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately the people on the bread line will still be on the bread line no matter which side wins. Anyone who thinks different will end up very disappointed. It's just a shame that both sides are giving the impression that it's all going to be sweetness and light if you vote for them.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 8, 2014)

Irvine nails it again

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/09/08/labour-pains-labour-of-love/


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			No, if you look closely you will see there has been a major hit on Scottish company shares. It even made the news. It seems the whole thing has suddenly become newsworthy on the BBC.
		
Click to expand...

I think the drop in the pound value is more to do with the long term problems that England will have to face without the additional off set from Scotland's balance of payments surplus. Not much to do with Scotland at all.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			No, if you look closely you will see there has been a major hit on Scottish company shares. It even made the news. It seems the whole thing has suddenly become newsworthy on the BBC.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed - as mentioned earlier - we only started discussing this on the board back in....January!  So we spotted this coming.  And yet this morning UK MSM seem to have woken up to it with a start!


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 8, 2014)

Opposite with me, I find the Yes voters more "in your face" as they are very passionate about it.

Whatever the outcome there are going to be a lot of unhappy and bitter Scots, especially if the "No" vote wins


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			It is interesting that the one group that YES seem to be failing to attract is the 16-18 year old's. The group that many on here thought were locked on Yes voters

I have asked my four grandchildren how I should vote.
All four, 5 to 12 years old, have said No as they don't want things to change.
		
Click to expand...

Seems your grandchildren would like you to give them a secure future.

The 16-18 yr vote is interesting, they seem to be more on the unified train of thought including the EU stance.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Unfortunately the people on the bread line will still be on the bread line no matter which side wins. Anyone who thinks different will end up very disappointed. It's just a shame that both sides are giving the impression that it's all going to be sweetness and light if you vote for them.
		
Click to expand...

To be fair I don't think many on the YES side think all is going to be all tickety-boo and hunky-dory following a YES - as much as the YES camp might say.  And likewise a NO status quo isn't going to be painless - notwithstanding promises that Gideon & Co might make.  There are cuts in the pipline that won't be cancelled so there is going to be status quo pain before any gain.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 8, 2014)

SAPCOR1 said:



			Whatever the outcome there are going to be a lot of unhappy and bitter Scots,  whoever wins
		
Click to expand...

Fixed that.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 8, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			To be fair I don't think many on the YES side think all is going to be all tickety-boo and hunky-dory following a YES - as much as the YES camp might say.  And likewise a NO status quo isn't going to be painless - notwithstanding promises that Gideon & Co might make.  There are cuts in the pipline that won't be cancelled so there is going to be status quo pain before any gain.
		
Click to expand...

If only the Scots could realise it is going to happen in the whole of the UK instead of taking it as a personal attack on north of the border.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			From what I can see in Ayrshire the YES voters seem to form a broad church.
In my circle of Yes friends there are accountants, civil servants, bankers, forestry workers, farmers, council workers and OAP's. They tend to be quiet.
My No friends include business men/women, hoteliers, shop keepers, OAP's and factory workers. They tend to be in your face loud.
		
Click to expand...

That seems to go against everything I've seen on here/heard in passing. I've always gathered the impression that the YES vote is the much louder.

And I'm genuinly surprised about the accountants. a) if tax laws become simpler, less jobs for them. b) we have prudence as our mandate, which would suggest followed the status quo.

Oh and the bankers. Why would they not want to be connected closely with London, one of the banking hubs!!

In all honesty, if you were just to swap the YES and the NO in those descriptions, that would honestly be the impression I had previously gathered


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 8, 2014)

Cheeky!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			If only the Scots could realise it is going to happen in the whole of the UK instead of taking it as a personal attack on north of the border.
		
Click to expand...

They may well realise - but they also realise that they have a once in a lifetime (ever) opportunity to do something about it - a chance denied the rest of the UK at the moment.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			That seems to go against everything I've seen on here/heard in passing. I've always gathered the impression that the YES vote is the much louder.

And I'm genuinly surprised about the accountants. a) if tax laws become simpler, less jobs for them. b) we have prudence as our mandate, which would suggest followed the status quo.

Oh and the bankers. Why would they not want to be connected closely with London, one of the banking hubs!!

In all honesty, if you were just to swap the YES and the NO in those descriptions, that would honestly be the impression I had previously gathered
		
Click to expand...

Depends where you are I guess.  In the part of the constituency of Eastwood/East Renfrewshire where I am from you will hear a very vocal and noisy NO - that certainly seemed to be the case given the support a NO campaigner was getting last time I was up as he was canvassing for support outside local shops.  But go 2 miles down the road and I suspect a very different view commonly held.


----------



## Imurg (Sep 8, 2014)

SAPCOR1 said:



			Whatever the outcome there are going to be a lot of unhappy and bitter Scots, especially if the "No" vote wins
		
Click to expand...

I've said all along I find it staggering that a straight majority is going to win. 50.01% is a winning number which alienates virtually half the electorate.
That's the way it is but surely a 2/3's majority would give a more meaningful mandate..


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 8, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			That seems to go against everything I've seen on here/heard in passing. I've always gathered the impression that the YES vote is the much louder.

And I'm genuinly surprised about the accountants. a) if tax laws become simpler, less jobs for them. b) we have prudence as our mandate, which would suggest followed the status quo.



Oh and the bankers. Why would they not want to be connected closely with London, one of the banking hubs!!

In all honesty, if you were just to swap the YES and the NO in those descriptions, that would honestly be the impression I had previously gathered
		
Click to expand...

That is why most folk south of the border have called it totally wrong.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 8, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			To be fair I don't think many on the YES side think all is going to be all tickety-boo and hunky-dory following a YES - as much as the YES camp might say.  And likewise a NO status quo isn't going to be painless - notwithstanding promises that Gideon & Co might make.  There are cuts in the pipline that won't be cancelled so there is going to be status quo pain before any gain.
		
Click to expand...

Quite enlightening to see on a TV debate a couple of young YES supporters who said that the would accept a hike in taxes if it gave Scotland a more equal society.....I would too.


----------



## Val (Sep 8, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Seems like the markets have started to give their verdict.
		
Click to expand...

Yip, and it's not because of no currency union.


----------



## Val (Sep 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think the drop in the pound value is more to do with the long term problems that England will have to face without the additional off set from Scotland's balance of payments surplus. Not much to do with Scotland at all.
		
Click to expand...

Go read that contradiction again. How can it be nothing to so with Scotland if it's Scotland that's affecting it?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			That is why most folk south of the border have called it totally wrong.
		
Click to expand...

They may well have called it right. Noone will know until the vote.

Just had a thought. For you Scots, would it not have been better, when it was announced to have a referendum a week later, with the question "do you want scotland to remain in the union, as of 1 January 2016?". That would have resulted in none of the political nonsense and debating, and made it about the root of the question.


would that have worked, or am I talkin nonsense?


----------



## Alan (Sep 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Quite enlightening to see on a TV debate a couple of young YES supporters who said that the would accept a hike in taxes if it gave Scotland a more equal society.....I would too.
		
Click to expand...

So would I. It's not going to be easy, but it's going to happen, I've been canvassing in my local area and the Yes vote is well over 60%, the polls for the current government are bollox.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 8, 2014)

Alan said:



			I've been canvassing in my local area and the Yes vote is well over 60%.
		
Click to expand...

These are people saying they will vote Yes or people who have voted and you know have been and voted Yes.


----------



## Junior (Sep 8, 2014)

I've been following the debate but I dont profess to be clever enough to understand the currency or defense implications in their entirety.....however. I'm happy for our Scottish brothers and sisters to be happy.

But I think that Scotland then has to appreciate that, if the link is severed, we (England, Wales and Northern Ireland) also have the same liberty to pick and choose what we do and dont do for Scotland. As members of the union we have duties to one and other. Not so much as neighbouring countries.  

Imo, two are stronger than one, three  stronger than two and four stronger than three.  I'd encourage the Scots to consider the bad times and the good , and make their decision - which they will.

I'm 100% behind what they decide.


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 8, 2014)

Alan said:



			So would I. It's not going to be easy, but it's going to happen, I've been canvassing in my local area and the Yes vote is well over 60%, the polls for the current government are bollox.
		
Click to expand...


A fair proportion of them will tell you that to get rid of you


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Quite enlightening to see on a TV debate a couple of young YES supporters who said that the would accept a hike in taxes if it gave Scotland a more equal society.....I would too.
		
Click to expand...

A hike in taxes!  No thanks


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 8, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Irvine nails it again

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/09/08/labour-pains-labour-of-love/

Click to expand...

Lives in Chicago and before that Dublin, that nails it right enough.....


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 8, 2014)

Advice for the three London Leaders.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR6wok7g7do


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 8, 2014)

williamalex1 said:





patricks148 said:



			in most cases I've found it depends on who you are asking. Ive just come back from a few days a way with a the group of guys all of which all are either: Lawyers, Doctors and Retired Bankers and a Judge all are No Voters.
		
Click to expand...

Not surprising as they have more to lose , but the people on the bread line have nothing to lose and there seems to be more of them, I'm afraid.

Click to expand...

And they are probably some of the few that voted Conservative too.


----------



## harpo_72 (Sep 8, 2014)

What is the unemployment figure for Scotland? Will they be supported by the income tax payers? Has the EC guaranteed entry ? What sustainable industries has Scotland got? 
I think I would ask these questions myself plus I would want to know if my employee had plans regarding the vote ... Sadly the situation seems to be bitter either way Scotland has lost


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 8, 2014)

harpo_72 said:



			What is the unemployment figure for Scotland? Will they be supported by the income tax payers? Has the EC guaranteed entry ? What sustainable industries has Scotland got? 
I think I would ask these questions myself plus I would want to know if my employee had plans regarding the vote ... Sadly the situation seems to be bitter either way Scotland has lost
		
Click to expand...

What's it got to do with an employer how his/her employee votes?


----------



## harpo_72 (Sep 8, 2014)

SAPCOR1 said:



			What's it got to do with an employer how his/her employee votes?
		
Click to expand...

Nothing you would think ... But then reality is another thing altogether. Think about it, would the company stay if it would lose money ? So would you vote to effectively loose your job? It's worst case scenario but I would not dismiss it out of hand, I would definitely think about the consequences of my vote with regards my future ...


----------



## Fyldewhite (Sep 8, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Quite enlightening to see on a TV debate a couple of young YES supporters who said that the would accept a hike in taxes if it gave Scotland a more equal society.....I would too.
		
Click to expand...

I agree. Not commented on any of this yet but an increasingly disenfranchised society over many years has lead to a fundamental split being on the cards. No idea how it would work, what the cost would be but to put changes like this on a simple majority vote is madness. It should be a 2/3 vote needed otherwise the losing side will always claim dirty tactics and technicalities were the reason and that lack of acceptance will cause problems for a generation at least.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 8, 2014)

Fyldewhite said:



			I agree. Not commented on any of this yet but an increasingly disenfranchised society over many years has lead to a fundamental split being on the cards. No idea how it would work, what the cost would be but to put changes like this on a simple majority vote is madness. It should be a 2/3 vote needed otherwise the losing side will always claim dirty tactics and technicalities were the reason and that lack of acceptance will cause problems for a generation at least.
		
Click to expand...

George Cunningham managed to get that through for the 1979 referendum - when 40% of the total electorate had to vote YES - and so non-voters and deceased still on the electoral roll were deemed to be NO voters.  Your suggestion is valid but would have been still-born for this referendum.  The mistake was not having Devo-max on the ballot paper and for that we can all thank David Cameron.

And with Gordon Brown's initiative.  Well as a number of commentators have said this evening the big problem BT may not have over this is credibility.  This announcement has alsways been planned; it is not a panic reaction; the new powers have been thought through; the West lothian question has been resolved.  Aye right. BT seem to have over-stoked the currency fire and many undecided Scots have just got used to that heat and are now essentially ignoring it.  The 'new powers' initiative may do the trick for BT but they have to be believed and trusted.


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Sep 8, 2014)

harpo_72 said:



			Nothing you would think ... But then reality is another thing altogether. Think about it, would the company stay if it would lose money ? So would you vote to effectively loose your job? It's worst case scenario but I would not dismiss it out of hand, I would definitely think about the consequences of my vote with regards my future ...
		
Click to expand...

None of the employer's business and any pressure that may be exerted would be unfair.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

harpo_72 said:



			What is the unemployment figure for Scotland? Will they be supported by the income tax payers? Has the EC guaranteed entry ? What sustainable industries has Scotland got? 
I think I would ask these questions myself plus I would want to know if my employee had plans regarding the vote ... Sadly the situation seems to be bitter either way Scotland has lost
		
Click to expand...

Scottish unemployment is slightly higher than England.
Tax returns in Scotland are higher than England.
According to my passport I am a member of the EC, do you think they will just cancel out 5 million members.
What does the way my employer votes have to do with it ?
Situation is not bitter, quite civilised really.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Scottish unemployment is slightly higher than England.
Tax returns in Scotland are higher than England.
*According to my passport I am a member of the EC, do you think they will just cancel out 5 million members.
*What does the way my employer votes have to do with it ?
Situation is not bitter, quite civilised really.
		
Click to expand...

Your passport says you are a member of the EC because the UK meets the criteria for membership.

Does a new independent country that hasn't, as yet, got a Scooby what it's currency will be meet the current criteria for EU membership?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Labour-Market/TrendEconomicActivity


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Labour-Market/TrendEconomicActivity

Sorry wrong about figures.......first link not working.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 9, 2014)

I read in my morning paper (the _i_) that Rupe Murdoch and the Sun may be about to come out for a YES.

Wondering if that's cos he detests Westminster and all those meddling MPs wot got his beloved NotW and Rebekah Brookes in such a mess and wondering if YES campaign needs friends like these


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I read in my morning paper (the _i_) that Rupe Murdoch and the Sun may be about to come out for a YES.

Wondering if that's cos he detests Westminster and all those meddling MPs wot got his beloved NotW and Rebekah Brookes in such a mess and wondering if YES campaign needs friends like these
		
Click to expand...

Murdoch is everything I hate about politics and newspapers and I'm not happy at all if he wants to back my vote.I'm sure most folk on either side of any argument would agree he's a scumbag.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

He is the last guy I would want to see supporting Scotland.

Mind you he always has his eye on the money so he probably has a long term plan.


----------



## DCB (Sep 9, 2014)

I heard at the weekend that King Eck was talking to Murdoch and didn't believe it. Murdoch can stay out of this as far as I'm concerned, he'll just cause trouble.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 9, 2014)

Agree re Murdoch but am more concerned about the loathsome Brian Souter pulling the nats strings


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 9, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Agree re Murdoch but am more concerned about the loathsome Brian Souter pulling the nats strings
		
Click to expand...

Indeed.But you need to separate nats from yes voters.I think I dislike Souter as much as humanly possible and I'm sure the LGBT Yes movement also wouldn't invite him round for tea.

No one is pulling my string ( unfortunately)


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 9, 2014)

This is interesting, and begs the question, why would folk like Dewar/Brown and Darling move it and the timing also reeks.Better Together, with this kind of evidence?Aye right.

[video=youtube_share;GfbfldSrJ-0]http://youtu.be/GfbfldSrJ-0[/video]


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is interesting, and begs the question, why would folk like Dewar/Brown and Darling move it and the timing also reeks.Better Together, with this kind of evidence?Aye right.

[video=youtube_share;GfbfldSrJ-0]http://youtu.be/GfbfldSrJ-0[/video]
		
Click to expand...

very interesting indeed.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 9, 2014)

Apparently I've already contributed to this thread back in the mists of time.  But I'm buggered if I can remember what I said.  So in order not to contradict myself I'll give my opinion, feel free to delete the bits you don't agree with.

I think it's a _great idea as the Scots deserve to be masters of their own destiny/stupid idea as they have no chance on their own in todays globalised economy_ and economically Scotland will _prosper by being able to control its own finances/crash spectacularly on its own and be have to be bailed out by a bunch of smug English politicians saying 'told you so'._


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is interesting, and begs the question, why would folk like Dewar/Brown and Darling move it and the timing also reeks.Better Together, with this kind of evidence?Aye right.
		
Click to expand...

Obscene. But unsurprising!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 9, 2014)

Interesting to see PMQT being cancelled tomorrow, plus the raft of new powers being offered.

The NHS one in particular.If I lived in England/Wales I'd be disgusted with this promise to safe guard The NHS...it looks like a way of setting Scotland against England/Wales/NI, something no one wants I think.Seriously, if this is what they call Better Together, we're better under independence, for everyones sake.


----------



## DCB (Sep 9, 2014)

The seabed boundary issue is old hat. It was changed 15 years ago and no-one has really questioned it until now. SNP did try to fight this, but to no avail. There's still a lot of water out there and seabed  that is "ours"


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 9, 2014)

DCB said:



			The seabed boundary issue is old hat. It was changed 15 years ago and no-one has really questioned it until now. SNP did try to fight this, but to no avail. There's still a lot of water out there and seabed  that is "ours"

View attachment 12188

Click to expand...

Why change it?Doesn't it worry you that it was changed on the date it was?

And if we do vote YES I'd hope the Scottish govt did challenge it


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

The Three Amegos all coming up to Scotland to 'campaign' tomorrow.
Saltires will fly from all English public buildings, why would they imply to be supporting the Yes campaign. Should obviously be the Union Flag........Very strange [don't panic , don't panic]

I think they have been summoned to the Balmoral carpet by the Heidie.


----------



## DCB (Sep 9, 2014)

1999 was a long time ago, we still 'loved' Tony at that time and thought he was the best thing since sliced bread. Sneaked through onto the Staute Books, but so is so much else in this world. It's really only an extension of the line of the Scottish and English boundary.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

Well that's my vote off.
I feel sorry for the postal voters who were unable to make a balanced educated choice due to the Bitter Together late announcement.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 9, 2014)

And so it came to pass - with the YES hordes of the evil Salmond assailing the walls of Helm Deep - and with brave Darling and his elfen allies battling to save the stronghold - Gandalf and the Riders of Rohan head north in a last minute attempt to save the Kingdom from destruction.  But will they succeed?


----------



## ger147 (Sep 9, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And so it came to pass - with the YES hordes of the evil Salmond assailing the walls of Helm Deep - and with brave Darling and his elfen allies battling to save the stronghold - Gandalf and the Riders of Rohan head north in a last minute attempt to save the Kingdom from destruction.  But will they succeed?
		
Click to expand...

Stick to your day job.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 9, 2014)

So Carney confirms that given the intransigence of Westminster political parties, a currency union won't work. All the Economic requirements are there, just not the political will at Westminster.I wonder how the Three Amigos will spin that one tomorrow?

And as they continue to bring confusion to the table,billions are being lost to European pension funds and the value of their currency.They really are making a complete mess of this.Too negative, too far, too bad.They'll reap what they sow.


----------



## Val (Sep 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So Carney confirms that given the intransigence of Westminster political parties, a currency union won't work. All the Economic requirements are there, just not the political will at Westminster.I wonder how the Three Amigos will spin that one tomorrow?

And as they continue to bring confusion to the table,billions are being lost to European pension funds and the value of their currency.They really are making a complete mess of this.Too negative, too far, too bad.They'll reap what they sow.
		
Click to expand...

Ever considered its the split that's causing it rather than the lack of a CU agreement or is that just not worth the YES voters considering


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Ever considered its the split that's causing it rather than the lack of a CU agreement or is that just not worth the YES voters considering
		
Click to expand...

Well of course if Scotland stayed in the union there would be no need for a currency union, but I thought we had maybe moved beyond that basic reasoning on this discussion?I was thinking more about solutions that suit both sides once YES wins.

8 year CU running alongside 8 year Trident storage, as I've been saying all along-as the palatable middle road solution, not my own suggestion, which is slightly more radical.


----------



## Fyldewhite (Sep 9, 2014)

I'm stopping in Glasgow on the night of the 18th en route further north. Can anyone recommend somewhere (bar) central that would be a good place to watch the proceedings from? Are any rallies planned or demos etc or places to avoid at all costs!! I guess all eyes will be on the TV screens and once the exit polls are announced at around 10:01 we'll effectively know the result. Suppose anything could then happen?? A Scottish guy I happened to be playing golf with last week suggested it could turn very nasty ........ Do I need a tin hat? Is this likely? Any advice appreciated.


----------



## Val (Sep 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Well of course if Scotland stayed in the union there would be no need for a currency union, but I thought we had maybe moved beyond that basic reasoning on this discussion?I was thinking more about solutions that suit both sides once YES wins.

8 year CU running alongside 8 year Trident storage, as I've been saying all along-as the palatable middle road solution, not my own suggestion, which is slightly more radical.
		
Click to expand...

So we are in agreement then, the thought of an independent Scotland is sending the markets in free fall?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So we are in agreement then, the thought of an independent Scotland is sending the markets in free fall?
		
Click to expand...

Yes.Combined with the refusal of the political elite in Westminster refusing ( for now) to contemplate a CU.

https://theconversation.com/could-c...-done-before-scotland-independence-vote-31438

Imagine if Salmond had said his plan A was a new currency and we're 9 days away from the Â£ being devalued by x.The markets would be in a whole worse condition and they'd be begging for a CU.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Imagine if Salmond had said his plan A was a new currency and we're 9 days away from the Â£ being devalued by x.The markets would be in a whole worse condition and they'd be begging for a CU.
		
Click to expand...

I said that a while ago and got pelters.

Are the English politicians and press so dim that they cannot see the threat to the UK pound if Scotland withdrew from a CU.

Interesting to see the debate has become much sharper and interesting since Scottish political media are more involved instead of the usual national suspects.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

Fyldewhite said:



			I'm stopping in Glasgow on the night of the 18th en route further north. Can anyone recommend somewhere (bar) central that would be a good place to watch the proceedings from? Are any rallies planned or demos etc or places to avoid at all costs!! I guess all eyes will be on the TV screens and once the exit polls are announced at around 10:01 we'll effectively know the result. Suppose anything could then happen?? A Scottish guy I happened to be playing golf with last week suggested it could turn very nasty ........ Do I need a tin hat? Is this likely? Any advice appreciated.
		
Click to expand...

I would play safe and avoid Glasgow.
There are sufficient fools on both sides.

Latest news, yesterdays shares have recovered, no surprise there then.


----------



## Val (Sep 9, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Yes.Combined with the refusal of the political elite in Westminster refusing ( for now) to contemplate a CU.

https://theconversation.com/could-c...-done-before-scotland-independence-vote-31438

Imagine if Salmond had said his plan A was a new currency and we're 9 days away from the Â£ being devalued by x.The markets would be in a whole worse condition and they'd be begging for a CU.
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			I said that a while ago and got pelters.

Are the English politicians and press so dim that they cannot see the threat to the UK pound if Scotland withdrew from a CU.

Interesting to see the debate has become much sharper and interesting since Scottish political media are more involved instead of the usual national suspects.
		
Click to expand...

The lack of a CU is not what has destabilised the market, the break up of the union is what is pushing it


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

Oh Dear.

Good start to the Three Amigos Tour [not]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XyEzZ57wdE

Sorry ,could not clever enough to find the Benny Hill music.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Interesting to see the debate has become much sharper and interesting since Scottish political media are more involved instead of the usual national suspects.
		
Click to expand...

Not coming from a biased point of view in the slightest.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Not coming from a biased point of view in the slightest.
		
Click to expand...

Strange comment.......the Scots political commentators are much more up to speed with what is happening in Scotland than the Westminster ones.
Suggesting they are biased is so far off the mark it is basically insulting.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Strange comment.......the Scots political commentators are much more up to speed with what is happening in Scotland than the Westminster ones.
Suggesting they are biased is so far off the mark it is basically insulting.
		
Click to expand...

Don't worry, I wasn't saying they were biased, I was saying you were. The implication from your post coming across that the Scottish political media are much sharper than the "usual national suspects".

It wasn't an overly serious reflection, just a throw away jokey comment.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 9, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			It wasn't an overly serious reflection, just a throw away jokey comment.
		
Click to expand...

Which seems to be the way the English Media and Politicians have been treating the 'Yes' viewpoint up until last weekend!


----------



## Val (Sep 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I would play safe and avoid Glasgow.
There are sufficient fools on both sides.

Latest news, yesterdays shares have recovered, no surprise there then.
		
Click to expand...

Where do you get your info? FTSE is down today again.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Oh Dear.

Good start to the Three Amigos Tour [not]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XyEzZ57wdE

Sorry ,could not clever enough to find the Benny Hill music.
		
Click to expand...

And raising the Saltire above 10 Downing Street - oh for goodness sake.  Sorry - but I just laughed,


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Where do you get your info? FTSE is down today again.
		
Click to expand...

Ah! The old selective reporting trick! (Or Lies, damned lies and statisatics! No doubt including these ones!) FTSE not down as much as other bourses. The Scottish companies are probably up on yesterday - the couple I looked at certainly were.

Pound down very marginally against Dollar and Euro, but quite possibly more to do with speeches to/at TUC than about Scotland!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Don't worry, I wasn't saying they were biased, I was saying you were. The implication from your post coming across that the Scottish political media are much sharper than the "usual national suspects".

It wasn't an overly serious reflection, just a throw away jokey comment.
		
Click to expand...

Ok sorry about that.

I do tend to have a poor reflection on modern Westminster political commentators , most seem to be stuck up their own rear ends.
They used to be so good.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Where do you get your info? FTSE is down today again.
		
Click to expand...

Sky news, The 'Scottish' shares that were all over the news yesterday [ or are the not Scottish any  more now they have gone back to where they were]
BTW the falling pound is more or less where it was 5 months ago. Re alignment I think they called it on Sky news.

OH NAW....just realised Sky News is owned by Rupert Murdoch. [see earlier posts]


----------



## Val (Sep 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Sky news, The 'Scottish' shares that were all over the news yesterday [ or are the not Scottish any  more now they have gone back to where they were]
BTW the falling pound is more or less where it was 5 months ago. Re alignment I think they called it on Sky news.

OH NAW....just realised Sky News is owned by Rupert Murdoch. [see earlier posts]
		
Click to expand...

The pound is at a 11 month low against the dollar it was almost 1.70 in May (5 months), it's not realignment as that normally happens over the course of a few days, you don't realign that much.


----------



## Val (Sep 9, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Ah! The old selective reporting trick! (Or Lies, damned lies and statisatics! No doubt including these ones!) FTSE not down as much as other bourses. The Scottish companies are probably up on yesterday - the couple I looked at certainly were.

Pound down very marginally against Dollar and Euro, but quite possibly more to do with speeches to/at TUC than about Scotland!
		
Click to expand...

Currency reacts quickly to changes in the market, still down on Friday with little/no recovery on the USD yet.


----------



## JT77 (Sep 9, 2014)

Have read some of what's being said and have followed a little so apologies if this has been asked. 

Have the Scottish public been given enough information and time to make a valid choice on the future of their nation?

It is a massive decision to undertake for a one off vote and all I have seemed to hear about it the currency union. 
Have the sides given any solid policies or guarantees?  I know mr salmond has his white paper but does that have any real substance or is it just ideals? Has he outlined how the health of the nation will be maintained or the education systems? Policing, armed forces? 
If I was voting I would want how these are being funded and what actual plans are in place to make sure they happen.  I would also like to know what structure my future government would undertake and their salary expectations. And I'm sure many more things too. 

As I said I'm only an outsider looking in, not sure what affect it will have on me if any and apologies if this has been covered.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 9, 2014)

I know that 7k Scotland fans on the Don Revie in Dortmund over the weekend cannot be taken as a straw poll but from what I seen the huge,huge majority there were YES.

The tide has and is turning.


----------



## JT77 (Sep 9, 2014)

As a jovial aside dodger the English fans were singing that they too were to vote yes at last nights game


----------



## Dodger (Sep 9, 2014)

JT77 said:



			As a jovial aside dodger the English fans were singing that they too were to vote yes at last nights game 

Click to expand...

All the more reason to say Aye.

Germans made me laugh at the weekend with "We hate England more than you".


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 9, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I know that 7k Scotland fans on the Don Revie in Dortmund over the weekend cannot be taken as a straw poll but from what I seen the huge,huge majority there were YES.

The tide has and is turning.
		
Click to expand...

Ja Jawohl


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 9, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Ja Jawohl
		
Click to expand...


We We Weeeeeeeeeeeee oui.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 9, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			We We Weeeeeeeeeeeee
		
Click to expand...

No doon yer kegs again  i hope.:rofl:


----------



## Val (Sep 9, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I know that 7k Scotland fans on the Don Revie in Dortmund over the weekend cannot be taken as a straw poll but from what I seen the huge,huge majority there were YES.

The tide has and is turning.
		
Click to expand...

It sure is unfortunately


----------



## ColchesterFC (Sep 9, 2014)

I've managed to avoid commenting on this thread so far and so would like to congratulate everyone on getting to over 200 pages on a highly emotive subject without the thread being closed down by the Mods.

I don't believe that whatever the outcome of the vote my life will change that much. But............

The more I hear from the politicians the more I hope that there is a YES vote. This isn't because I've listened to all the debates and have come to a conclusion or for any kind of personal or political reason other than the fact that I don't really like politicians and whatever happens after a YES vote there will be a lot of politicians with egg on their faces.

Without getting into each side's reasoning too much it seems to me that in the event of a YES vote Alex Salmond has said that there will be unicorns galloping through the Highlands farting free money for all. And the Better Together campaign have said that if the Scots vote YES everyone will immediately become poor and will all die of starvation within 15 minutes.

I'd like to see a YES vote for the simple reason that it will amuse me to watch a lot of politicians have their reputations ruined by their predictions being so wildly inaccurate.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 10, 2014)

ColchesterFC said:



			I'd like to see a YES vote for the simple reason that it will amuse me to watch a lot of politicians have their reputations ruined by their predictions being so wildly inaccurate.
		
Click to expand...

I think you will find that two of The Three Amegos reputations are ruined long before the debate started.
If Yes win Cameron will have to resign and throw further confusion on the 2016 rUK elections.


----------



## delc (Sep 10, 2014)

From an English point of view, the Labour Party will lose it's power base in Scotland if a Yes vote, so little chance of another incompetent Labour Government for the rest of the UK.  From a Scottish point of view, they will be lumbered with a Labour/SNP Government, so expect bankruptcy and extortionate tax rates.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 10, 2014)

Valentino said:



			It sure is unfortunately
		
Click to expand...

I'm surprised he managed to get around them all. As to the other comment, as a long time fan of Dortmund I have never heard that little dittie and you also need to steer clear of the yellow handbags, they tend to blur your hearing and any sence of reasonable thought.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 10, 2014)

delc said:



			From an English point of view, the Labour Party will lose it's power base in Scotland if a Yes vote, so little chance of another incompetent Labour Government for the rest of the UK.  From a Scottish point of view, they will be lumbered with a Labour/SNP Government, so expect bankruptcy and extortionate tax rates. 

Click to expand...

But the poor will have a better life.


----------



## delc (Sep 10, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			But the poor will have a better life.
		
Click to expand...

Even the poor will much worse off when Scotland goes bankrupt!  Due to the Labour Party's power base in Scotland, it has enjoyed a cosy subsidised existence for many years, and many leading UK politicians have been Scottish.  We English will be better off without you, but on the other hand it seems stupid to break up a Union that has worked well for hundreds of years.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 10, 2014)

Folk are queuing up to register to vote and as Salmond says, I am sure they are not queuing up to vote no.

Please tell me what is wrong with helping the poor to a better life?
Scotland has one of the richest and at the same time unequal societies in the world, I would like to do my bit to change that.


----------



## delc (Sep 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Folk are queuing up to register to vote and as Salmond says, I am sure they are not queuing up to vote no.

Please tell me what is wrong with helping the poor to a better life?
Scotland has one of the richest and at the same time unequal societies in the world, I would like to do my bit to change that.
		
Click to expand...

By making everybody equally poor?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 10, 2014)

delc said:



			By making everybody equally poor?  

Click to expand...

That would allude to a very negative attitude to life.

I have a much more positive attitude.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Folk are queuing up to register to vote and as Salmond says, I am sure they are not queuing up to vote no.
		
Click to expand...

Or they have seen how much YES has risen recently, and gone "balls to that, I'm definitely going to vote NO now!"

Could work either way. Either people jump on the bandwagon of YES, or where before they may have been too lazy to vote NO, this spurs them into action.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

Two observations.

1. The Â£ weakening against the Euro/$ seems to have been taken as a negative but I see it as a pretty good thing to happen, just like when it was nearly 2:1 a few years back.It's good for British business exporting.Not so good for tourism/importers, but if I'm not mistaken, our trade balance is a touch off?


2.The Labour Party.I think the party in Scotland is effectively dead, no matter what the outcome of the referendum.If we vote YES the backlash internally will be spectacular, with the blame game reaching all the way to the very top...I mean, c'mon, who honestly takes Johann Lamont seriously?I'm not she takes herself seriously.And Brown/Darling will slope off back into the ether never to be heard of again.If NO wins they've isolated themselves from a pretty hefty % of their core voters ( that used to include me) that will never go back.They've crawled into bed with Westminster Conservatives and delivered the message Cameron refused to do himself.Labour in The rUK are also pretty much done...if we vote YES then they lose 49(?) MPs right away and Milliband has to go, who's taking his place?Ed Balls?lol 

Looking forward to seeing what the three have to say today...interesting that Milliband is going to 'safe' Lanarkshire...I reckon he's gonna get a big surprise.

Also look out for Survation late today.....


----------



## ger147 (Sep 10, 2014)

Miliband coming to Lanarkshire? I think I'll play golf today...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Don't worry, I wasn't saying they were biased, I was saying you were. The implication from your post coming across that the Scottish political media are much sharper than the "usual national suspects".

It wasn't an overly serious reflection, just a throw away jokey comment.
		
Click to expand...

I value and trust Brian Taylor's comments and assessment of the situation.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

And just for the hell of it, here's who survation carried out the poll for:

http://fivemillionquestions.org/about

http://www.betternation.org/raison-detre-2/

I know of one the guys who is involved with 5 million q's...David Torrance, who as much as he'll denying it, him being a journalist, is very much a NO vote.Good guy and his work is excellent, which leads me to think if they've commissioned this poll, it should show a NO lead...if it doesn't, I'll be surprised/happy/terrified.


----------



## delc (Sep 10, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Miliband coming to Lanarkshire? I think I'll play golf today...
		
Click to expand...

Ed Milliband is a total loser anyway.  He looks like Wallace as in "Wallace and Gromit", has a stupid voice and puts forward stupid arguments. Why the Trade Unions voted him in a leader of the Labour Party is beyond me, unless they have a death wish!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I value and trust Brian Taylor's comments and assessment of the situation.
		
Click to expand...

Both Brian Taylor and James Cook on BBC, along with Bernard Ponsonby and John Mackay on STV have been pretty fair over the last 18 months.The same CANNOT be said about the BBC as an entity,and you can see why given their demise in Scotland looks nearer every day, but inexcusable as reporters.STV have been significantly better.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Both Brian Taylor and James Cook on BBC, along with Bernard Ponsonby and John Mackay on STV have been pretty fair over the last 18 months.The same CANNOT be said about the BBC as an entity,and you can see why given their demise in Scotland looks nearer every day, but inexcusable as reporters.STV have been significantly better.
		
Click to expand...

Dead right...as I said earlier they make the Westminster correspondents look like totally under prepared one trick ponies.

Andrew Marr's 'we' [meaning Bitter Together] in conversation with Salmond being a classic blunder.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think you will find that two of *The Three Amegos* reputations are ruined long before the debate started.
If Yes win Cameron will have to resign and throw further confusion on the 2016 rUK elections.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe Amegos - but us they head to Scotland to enter the fray (the fray that they swore that they'd keep out of as vote being solely a matter for Scotland and Holyrood politicians) the three amegos become perhaps the three mousketeers.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Dead right...as I said earlier they make the Westminster correspondents look like totally under prepared one trick ponies.

Andrew Marr's 'we' [meaning Bitter Together] in conversation with Salmond being a classic blunder.
		
Click to expand...

It would be like sending Cook/Mackay down to cover the London Mayoral election with three days notice and no previous interest.Anyone looking for the right info from the media should be looking at the ones who have covered it from before the ref debate started 2 years ago!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Both Brian Taylor and James Cook on BBC, along with Bernard Ponsonby and John Mackay on STV have been pretty fair over the last 18 months.The same CANNOT be said about the BBC as an entity,and you can see why given their demise in Scotland looks nearer every day, but inexcusable as reporters.STV have been significantly better.
		
Click to expand...

Will have to watch more STV.  I've now set up STV as an additional channel on my didbox but haven't been watching so far (just habit I guess as I never used to watch any STV other than Cartoon Cavalcade and Scotsport)


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Will have to watch more STV.  I've now set up STV as an additional channel on my didbox but haven't been watching so far (just habit I guess as I never used to watch any STV other than Cartoon Cavalcade and Scotsport)
		
Click to expand...

Watch the last two nights Scotland 2014 10.30pm...Ponsonby really gives it to both Salmond and Darling.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

I'm thinking that this additional powers initiative may well have been planned all along as a last week 'killer blow' to the YES campaign.  But that was on the assumption that NO would be well ahead and this would be sufficient to sway undecided the way of a NO - just in case.  The fact that details would be sketchy would not really matter as NO would be a certainty.

But as we are neck and neck according to the polls the sketchiness of the plans actually matters.  I do think however that many undecided will be swayed to vote NO by it - and probably enough to swing the whole thing to NO.  It just depends how BT and Westminsters guys and gals play it over the next few days.  Get it right - and with Gordie Broons support hitting into Labour heartlands - they may well save the Union.  But they will have set up a constitutional crisis and mess about 'what next?' for Scotland and the regions.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 10, 2014)

delc said:



			Ed Milliband is a total loser anyway.  He looks like Wallace as in "Wallace and Gromit", has a stupid voice and *puts forward stupid arguments*. Why the Trade Unions voted him in a leader of the Labour Party is beyond me, unless they have a death wish! 

Click to expand...

From an apparent expert on the subject!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			From an apparent expert on the subject! 

Click to expand...

You don't have to be an expert to have an opinion.  It might matter if our opinions actually made any difference - but in general they don't.  They just remain opinions wafting about and then disappearing like mist on a summer's day.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Watch the last two nights Scotland 2014 10.30pm...Ponsonby really gives it to both Salmond and Darling.
		
Click to expand...

Yes - I watch Scotland 2014 every night - essential viewing.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It would be like sending Cook/Mackay down to cover the London Mayoral election with three days notice and no previous interest.Anyone looking for the right info from the media should be looking at the ones who have covered it from before the ref debate started 2 years ago!
		
Click to expand...

Social media and the radio tell a totally different story from the newspapers and BBC.

No vote being slaughtered on the phone in's at present.
Even some of the No voters admit they have lost it.
Trident still high on the agenda and a 'fairer society'.

Thinking differently........one woman suggested turning the Barnett Formula on it's head.
Scotland keeps all of it's earned income/wealth /tax and sends an agreed proportion down to Westminster.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Social media and the radio tell a totally different story from the newspapers and BBC.

No vote being slaughtered on the phone in's at present.
Even some of the No voters admit they have lost it.
Trident still high on the agenda and a 'fairer society'.
		
Click to expand...

There's certainly a lot of "yes" triumphalism going on. Prematurely, in my opinion.

Yes votes are much more vocal. They want independence, it's an exciting time for them, they are fired up... brave new world etc etc... Most of them talking absolute rubbish, perfectly conned by the nats. 

Most "nos" are fed up with the whole thing. We're broadly happy with our constitutional set up and believe things can change for the better within the existing UK framework. When we do chime in, we are derided for being "negative" or "feart" or "unpatriotic" or "in bed with the tories" - all nonsense. The vast majority of no voters have their heads down quietly waiting to finally put the whole nonsense to bed next week.


----------



## AlexDarling (Sep 10, 2014)

I have followed this discussion from afar and noticed only a few highly 'vocal' individuals who offer not many facts and certainly try for the 'ridicule the opposition' tactic. Quite a cheap ploy but I think most people see through the belittling.

I find it rather sad that so many Scots have been duped into believing total independence is a good thing by a man who is clearly out for his own selfish agenda.

I am fully behind greater powers and control for Scotland but it's being proferred the wrong way. Breaking us up is not the way to mend a faulty system, working together for the better good is the right way for the UK and Europe in the long run.

heres an interesting article in the Telegraph from Monday about the deceit of Alex Salmonds YES campaign.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/big-deceit-heart-alex-salmond-191955797.html


oh, and I do play golf, very well if I say so myself. But the referendum is taking up all my spare time right now.


----------



## AlexDarling (Sep 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			There's certainly a lot of "yes" triumphalism going on. Prematurely, in my opinion.

Yes votes are much more vocal. They want independence, it's an exciting time for them, they are fired up... brave new world etc etc... Most of them talking absolute rubbish, perfectly conned by the nats. 

Most "nos" are fed up with the whole thing. We're broadly happy with our constitutional set up and believe things can change for the better within the existing UK framework. When we do chime in, we are derided for being "negative" or "feart" or "unpatriotic" or "in bed with the tories" - all nonsense. The vast majority of no voters have their heads down quietly waiting to finally put the whole nonsense to bed next week.
		
Click to expand...

you sir, speak sense. Many of your posts have cut through the swaggerings of the yes campaign despite the conjecturing and supposition they argue with. I salute you.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Most "nos" are fed up with the whole thing. We're broadly happy with our constitutional set up and believe things can change for the better within the existing UK framework. When we do chime in, we are derided for being "negative" or "feart" or "unpatriotic" or "in bed with the tories" - all nonsense. The vast majority of no voters have their heads down quietly waiting to finally put the whole nonsense to bed next week.
		
Click to expand...

A degree of truth in here, along with a degree of myth.

Point 1: you are in bed with the tories, no matter how unpalatable some find that.That's a fact.
Point 2 :The entire basis of BT is founded in 'project fear', a name they gave it themselves.It's fairly obvious that up until recently the BT mantra has been negative,.No one can dispute that.
Point 3: Unpatriotic.Only eedjits use that, like eedjits use blood and sand and nazism in reference to nationalism
Point 4: I think there is a degree of being embarrassed to vote no.Kinda like not being invited to a aprty then saying you had other plans anyway...a no voter gave me that line btw, he's still voting no.
Point 5: you have no constitution, no on ein The UK does, and thats kinda one of the points to voting YES.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 10, 2014)

AlexDarling said:



			you sir, speak sense.
		
Click to expand...

You may want to reassess that "sir" I think AD!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 10, 2014)

AlexDarling said:



			you sir, speak sense. Many of your posts have cut through the swaggerings of the yes campaign despite the conjecturing and supposition they argue with. I salute you.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you, my good lady.


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			and a 'fairer society'.
		
Click to expand...

Yes I heard that phrase bandied around quite a lot on Radio 5 this morning, but just what is this 'fairer society' they are on about?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A degree of truth in here, along with a degree of myth.

Point 1: you are in bed with the tories, no matter how unpalatable some find that.That's a fact.
Point 2 :The entire basis of BT is founded in 'project fear', a name they gave it themselves.It's fairly obvious that up until recently the BT mantra has been negative,.No one can dispute that.
Point 3: Unpatriotic.Only eedjits use that, like eedjits use blood and sand and nazism in reference to nationalism
Point 4: I think there is a degree of being embarrassed to vote no.Kinda like not being invited to a aprty then saying you had other plans anyway...a no voter gave me that line btw, he's still voting no.
Point 5: you have no constitution, no on ein The UK does, and thats kinda one of the points to voting YES.
		
Click to expand...

Point 1: Exactly one of the deceitful, scheming lines the nats trump out. I agree with the tories regarding independence and disagree with them on practically everything else. As does Alistair Darling etc... But you lot try and equate the two. This tactic is disgraceful.
Point 2: They are arguing against a proposal and are therefore bound to put a negative case. Salmond et al paint a rosy picture, BT are quite entitled to dispute his unbridled optimism. I don't hear the level of negativity you and other "yes" folk claim. Whenever BT state the benefits of the union the nats twist it into "fear" of losing that benefit. Another ploy, annoyingly successful. There is no doubt that "yes" have controlled the "debate".
Point 3: Agreed, but we've all heard it.
Point 4: Yip. It's good to see so many folk fired up and enthusiastic about something. Shame they're wrong.
Point 5: I was referring to "constitutional" set up in broad terms rather than an actual constitution but you're wrong on this one, if I remember my higher modern studies correctly  . We do have a constitution, but it is unwritten.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Point 1: Exactly one of the deceitful, scheming lines the nats trump out. I agree with the tories regarding independence and disagree with them on practically everything else. As does Alistair Darling etc... But you lot try and equate the two. This tactic is disgraceful.
Point 2: They are arguing against a proposal and are therefore bound to put a negative case. Salmond et al paint a rosy picture, BT are quite entitled to dispute his unbridled optimism. I don't hear the level of negativity you and other "yes" folk claim. Whenever BT state the benefits of the union the nats twist it into "fear" of losing that benefit. Another ploy, annoyingly successful. There is no doubt that "yes" have controlled the "debate".
Point 3: Agreed, but we've all heard it.
Point 4: Yip. It's good to see so many folk fired up and enthusiastic about something. Shame they're wrong.
Point 5: I was referring to "constitutional" set up in broad terms rather than an actual constitution but you're wrong on this one, if I remember my higher modern studies correctly  . We do have a constitution, but it is unwritten.
		
Click to expand...

re: being in bed with the tories, I'm discussing the referendum or a referendum thread and you are in bed with the tories on this subject, just like your in bed with lib dems and any other group affiliated with better together.

And we don;t have a constitution, we have a collection of laws that someone rather tiredly referred to as the unwritten constitution and it stuck.We do not have a constitution.


----------



## IanG (Sep 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			The vast majority of no voters have their heads down quietly waiting to finally put the whole nonsense to bed next week.
		
Click to expand...

I hope you're right, and I hope it doesn't rain on Thursday ! - looks like we need all the no voters to turn out. The yes vote will turn out whatever the weather. Ironic really that Scotland's future may turn on the weather.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			re: being in bed with the tories, I'm discussing the referendum or a referendum thread and you are in bed with the tories on this subject, just like your in bed with lib dems and any other group affiliated with better together.

And we don;t have a constitution, we have a collection of laws that someone rather tiredly referred to as the unwritten constitution and it stuck.We do not have a constitution.
		
Click to expand...

You are correct on this one issue. The nats are neglecting to specify that "on this issue you are in bed with the tories", as you did initially, it is duplicitous and typical of the campaign "yes" are running.

We do have a constitution, sorry you don't like it, but it exists even if it is somewhat nebulous.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			You are correct on this one issue. The nats are neglecting to specify that "on this issue you are in bed with the tories", as you did initially, it is duplicitous and typical of the campaign "yes" are running.

We do have a constitution, sorry you don't like it, but it exists even if it is somewhat nebulous.
		
Click to expand...

We're discussing the referendum, nothing else.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nebulous

I'm looking for something a wee bit more than that, we all should be.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

[video]https://skynews.grabyo.com/g/v/9mDFHtctx8O[/video]

Good to see Prescott up and campaigning for the YES vote....


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm looking for something a wee bit more than that, we all should be.
		
Click to expand...

Why would it make a difference, written or unwritten?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			We're discussing the referendum, nothing else.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nebulous

I'm looking for something a wee bit more than that, we all should be.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed but you and I both know the "yes" mob are trying to equate all the pro-union parties with the tories across a spectrum of policies. It is disingenuous, when challenged, to rein in and claim we're only discussing the referendum, you are smart enough to know the tactic being employed.

I happen to agree with you regarding a written constitution but it's not a reason (for me at least) to break up our country.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Why would it make a difference, written or unwritten?
		
Click to expand...

something unwritten isn't legal, I'd have thought?


----------



## Slab (Sep 10, 2014)

That B&Q chap is having a busy week so far...

Monday - Lunch with PM to get instructions
Tuesday - Tell Scots we'll stick up prices in-store 
Wednesday - Resign!


Thursday - Get new motto to replace 'Do It Yourself'


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			something unwritten isn't legal, I'd have thought?
		
Click to expand...

Verbal Contracts certainly are!

Written Constitutions can also become 'out of date', whereas Constitutional Laws that become out of date are, generally, introduced or repealed/brought up-to-date. Data Protection is an example, if not necessarily for good reasons!

There is quite a debate about the real reason the 2nd Amendment (the right to bear arms) was included in the US Constitution. And the English Bill of Rights, that it may have been based on, was hardly 'universal' either - being more a reflection of the squabbles of the time!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

And so we come to understand that what the three Westminster Parties are tossing into the debate around new powers does not break purdah rules because the statements come from political parties and not the government.  And purdah is designed to prevent a government coming up with new offers and sweetners to the electorate in the lead up to an election.  Seems semantics working hard here as all three parties seem to be promising that whatever party is in power post 2015 election - the government will deliver these promises.

And further - PMQs today William Hague was standing at the despatch box telling all and sundry that new powers will be forthcoming - hmmm.  That looked and sounded like government to me.

And Edward Leigh (or was it Christopher Choate) for one was not at all happy with his party/government offering Scotland all this new stuff without any debate in the Commons.  Not happy at all.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 10, 2014)

In the event of a NO vote can anyone tell me how all of these new panic stricken sweeteners will become law.........in 3 months.

Do our MP's have no say in the matter whatsoever.

Perhaps our newbie Alex Darling can answer that one.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			In the event of a NO vote can anyone tell me how all of these new panic stricken sweeteners will become law.........in 3 months.

Do our MP's have no say in the matter whatsoever.

Perhaps our newbie Alex Darling can answer that one.
		
Click to expand...

I think the timetable was to have the powers and timeline to deliver defined 25th January 2015 as can't see how they could actually get the bills through parliament.  Especially as English, Welsh and NOI MPs will *demand *a say both for what they want Scotland to get and what they want to change for their countries, regions and cities.  Maybe you can deliver additional Scottish powers independent of any considerations on what might be reqiured or happen beyond Scotland's border - but I just can't see it.

Also the fact that it is clear and 'admitted' that the government has agreed with Labour and Lib Dems to provide the additional powers I then do not really understand how this is not a de facto government statement of offer - and so something that breaks the purdah rules.  Anyway that's for them to justify,


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

Scotland tonight asked Nicola Sturgeon to debate Ed Milliband tonight, she said aye, he said No Thanks.

why would he do that?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Scotland tonight asked Nicola Sturgeon to debate Ed Milliband tonight, she said aye, he said No Thanks.

why would he do that?
		
Click to expand...

Listening on radio he's currently talking emotional 'stay with us' guff in Cumbernauld about how he wants to be taking his son to where Mr Miliband the elder served during the war - in a united country.  Emotive stuff Ed but you need to do better than that. You have a chance to save the union - don't blow it with too much emotive stuff.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Scotland tonight asked Nicola Sturgeon to debate Ed Milliband tonight, she said aye, he said No Thanks, I wouldn't be able to say more than two words without being interupted.

why would he do that?
		
Click to expand...


Fixed that for you Adi' :thup:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Fixed that for you Adi' :thup:
		
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt there is one politician in either parliament who could best wee Nicola in an argument, she's some lady.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I seriously doubt there is one politician in either parliament who could best wee Nicola in an argument, she's some lady.
		
Click to expand...

That goes for most women doesn't it?

I rarely come out winning against the wife


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 10, 2014)

Gareth said:



			That goes for most women doesn't it?

I rarely come out winning against the wife 

Click to expand...

Ha! Very True.

Dissapointed in milliband, though.If these guys are gonna come to Scotland and engage, don;t just do it from the safety of some controlled environment, debate the bloody thing properly.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I seriously doubt there is one politician in either parliament who could best wee Nicola in an argument, she's some lady.
		
Click to expand...

In today's parlance she would certainly own any opponent in the referendum debate.  An Irish female colleague of mine (who lives in England) said she really wished wee Nicola could be head-hunted by Westminster - she a big admirer of your Nicola.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Ha! Very True.

Dissapointed in milliband, though.If these guys are gonna come to Scotland and engage, don;t just do it from the safety of some controlled environment, debate the bloody thing properly.
		
Click to expand...

But this goes back to what Greg  (GB72) was saying on the England thread.

The whole essence of what independence means has got lost in the petty political bickering and point scoring. 

I don't see a debate between the two being any different.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

I get the feeling that a lot of the electorate have made up their mind and anything BT say or is said on their behalf will fall on deaf ears of YES and confirm view of NO.  

The chance they have for BT are clearly the undecideds and soft-YESers.  But Miliband, Cameron and Clegg need to get out there in amongst them, and stir it up; if necessary antagonise YES support - really wind them up; get lots of noise and generate hostility from YES support.  Such an 'atmosphere' might cause sufficient soft YES and undecideds to go NO - and save The Union.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I think the timetable was to have the powers and timeline to deliver defined 25th January 2015 as can't see how they could actually get the bills through parliament.  Especially as English, Welsh and NOI MPs will *demand *a say both for what they want Scotland to get and what they want to change for their countries, regions and cities.  Maybe you can deliver additional Scottish powers independent of any considerations on what might be reqiured or happen beyond Scotland's border - but I just can't see it.

Also the fact that it is clear and 'admitted' that the government has agreed with Labour and Lib Dems to provide the additional powers I then do not really understand how this is not a de facto government statement of offer - and so something that breaks the purdah rules.  Anyway that's for them to justify,
		
Click to expand...

My first thought was that The Three Amegos/Musketeers had broken the Purdah rules.
I was genuinely surprised to find out that the joint three Westminster party statement had not.
They must have sailed close to the wind though. Slick lawyer stuff.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 10, 2014)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ependence-better-together-campaign-new-advert

My daughter told me this Better Together advert convinced many Scots women to vote yes.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ependence-better-together-campaign-new-advert

My daughter told me this Better Together advert convinced many Scots women to vote yes.
		
Click to expand...

I read lots of abuse about this on social media and assumed it must be awful. I watched it and it isn't actually, just more smoke getting chucked up by "yes" folk rather than actually engage on the issues. The questions the woman in it is asking are being asked throughout the country (and not answered). 

Yes mob jumped on the fact that the woman in it is undecided and her husband has made up his mind. Typical of the "debate" shooting arrows at BT politicians and adverts rather than talk about the issues.


----------



## User62651 (Sep 10, 2014)

I did watch that to see what the fuss was about and I think the main issue was that women found it mildly offensive to be portrayed like 1950's housewives. It is also fairly negative. In contrast the Yes video with the young girl looking to the future may be a bit sicky sweet and cliched but its positive. NO campaign have played this referendum poorly, leaning too much on fear and not on what makes the UK good to be part of. They may have time yet but sending 3 political enemies up from England, 2 of whom are fairly toothless along with a failure of a leader in Brown coming out of the shadows and acting 'united' is not helping BT...imo.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I read lots of abuse about this on social media and assumed it must be awful. I watched it and it isn't actually, just more smoke getting chucked up by "yes" folk rather than actually engage on the issues. The questions the woman in it is asking are being asked throughout the country (and not answered). 

Yes mob jumped on the fact that the woman in it is undecided and her husband has made up his mind. Typical of the "debate" shooting arrows at BT politicians and adverts rather than talk about the issues.
		
Click to expand...

The whole tone of it and language used is not right.  I can see why some folks didn't like it.  The questions asked are valid but the 'well I've now spent 2minutes thinking about it - all the time I have to spend - and I've made up my mind - so on with the more important matters to me' is what is a bit odd.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 10, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Scotland tonight asked Nicola Sturgeon to debate Ed Milliband tonight, she said aye, he said No Thanks.

why would he do that?
		
Click to expand...

Because he is the leader of his party and she is someone down the lower order of the nationalists.

So No voters are in bed with the Tory's then it looks like the Yes campaign are in bed with the SNP.

No that cannot be right, the yes guys, that's those that live anywhere including the odd one who may live in Scotland say on here they arnt SNP supporters.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The whole tone of it and language used is not right.  I can see why some folks didn't like it.  The questions asked are valid but the 'well I've now spent 2minutes thinking about it - all the time I have to spend - and I've made up my mind - so on with the more important matters to me' is what is a bit odd.
		
Click to expand...

Oh yes, it's not great at all but the mock outrage it generated just shows how desperate the nats are to avoid answering the genuine questions that scots up and down the country are asking.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 10, 2014)

Sky news reporting latest polls show a swing to the No camp. 

6 point lead apparently.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 10, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Sky news reporting latest polls show a swing to the No camp. 

6 point lead apparently.
		
Click to expand...

Polls are fluctuating, it's hard to predict, going down to the wire in the only poll that counts.

Still, well done the three "amigos"


----------



## One Planer (Sep 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Polls are fluctuating, it's hard to predict, going down to the wire in the only poll that counts.

Still, well done the three "amigos" 

Click to expand...

Oh I expect it to narrow again for sure. 

I wonder if Salmomd is reviewing his comments about 'panic' right now. 

The visit appears to have had the desired effect.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 10, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Oh I expect it to narrow again for sure. 

I wonder if Salmomd is reviewing his comments about 'panic' right now. 

The visit appears to have had the desired effect.
		
Click to expand...

The Survation poll published today was conducted before today's visit by Cameron, Miliband and Clegg.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 10, 2014)

It's not only the English BC that is talking tripe but Jackie Bird got in on the scaremongering act tonight.

Disgraceful stuff but a tactic that seems very prevalent by the corporation............anyone would think that certain Parties have a say in what is broadcast.......

[video=youtube;WY64-t3QbcA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY64-t3QbcA[/video]


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 11, 2014)

I believe i mentioned before about the Islands wanting independence themselves, and was shot down.

This backs me up a little, and if true, is a big risk post YES?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...-tell-Alex-Salmond-We-might-stay-with-UK.html


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

RBS brass plate moving to London, not really a surprise.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Oh yes, it's not great at all but the mock outrage it generated just shows how desperate the nats are to avoid answering the genuine questions that scots up and down the country are asking.
		
Click to expand...

I didn't find it any anyway offensive or hugely annoying - just odd. And I detest confected outrage (similar to mock outrage as you say) over things like this.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			RBS brass plate moving to London, not really a surprise.
		
Click to expand...

We're pretty cheesed off with RBS NatWest at the moment and thinking of taking our Bank Account elsewhere in any case.  Notwithstanding any rights or wrongs financially on the RBS intentions - still feels to me that they are abandoning Scotland.  Well - that's up to them I suppose.  Unless of course it matters diddly-squat.  After all - I wouldn't have thought RBS has a big safe in that building in Edinburgh where they keep all my money.


----------



## Stuey01 (Sep 11, 2014)

So some people are allegedly making up their mind on what's best for the future of their country based on the fact they were a mildly irritated by a TV advert? Riiiiiiiight.
Personally I think a yes vote is disastrous for everyone, Scotland and the UK (no I will not use "rUK", it was is and will be UK whatever the result).
I fear it may happen, based largely on an anti-English vote rather than a pro-Scottish one, which is kinda sad.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			It's not only the English BC that is talking tripe but Jackie Bird got in on the scaremongering act tonight.

Disgraceful stuff but a tactic that seems very prevalent by the corporation............anyone would think that certain Parties have a say in what is broadcast.......

[video=youtube;WY64-t3QbcA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY64-t3QbcA[/video]
		
Click to expand...

Utter tripe!

I am fed up with all the "bias" nonsense the yes folk are trotting out. This video states that Mark Carney never used the phrase "Independent Scotland" and then shows a clip in which HE SAYS EXACTLY THAT PHRASE!!!!!!! It then tries to split hairs over the difference between "sovereignty" and "independence"? Aye right!

What Jackie Bird said was a perfectly valid interpretation of Mark Carney's statement and certainly the same meaning that I get from his words.

Stop attacking people who disagree with independence and maybe try addressing the valid concerns they have.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Because he is the leader of his party and she is someone down the lower order of the nationalists.

So No voters are in bed with the Tory's then it looks like the Yes campaign are in bed with the SNP.

No that cannot be right, the yes guys, that's those that live anywhere including the odd one who may live in Scotland say on here they arnt SNP supporters.
		
Click to expand...

But Salmond has debated Darling twice? 



CheltenhamHacker said:



			I believe i mentioned before about the Islands wanting independence themselves, and was shot down.

This backs me up a little, and if true, is a big risk post YES?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...-tell-Alex-Salmond-We-might-stay-with-UK.html

Click to expand...

They'd be entirely welcome in my opinion, but if the under current to this is oil, if they left Scotland to continue being part of rUK post YES, they'd not have much oil.International law would treat them as an enclave of rUK with waters upto 12 miles from land, so not much oil.

Yet again an example of poor reporting from the media, just like the half reporting from Carney yesterday, RBS today and Standard Life as well.And The BBC constantly.

It's really quite disheartening.The media, with possibly two exceptions, have gone so ott negative and inaccurate they better hope for a NO victory as they'll be seen as laughing stocks otherwise.What's happened to impartial reporting, to investigative journalism?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It's really quite disheartening.The media, with possibly two exceptions, have gone so ott negative and inaccurate they better hope for a NO victory as they'll be seen as laughing stocks otherwise.What's happened to impartial reporting, to investigative journalism?
		
Click to expand...

Just because Salmond et al can spin black into white doesn't mean the media have to follow suit.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Utter tripe!

I am fed up with all the "bias" nonsense the yes folk are trotting out. This video states that Mark Carney never used the phrase "Independent Scotland" and then shows a clip in which HE SAYS EXACTLY THAT PHRASE!!!!!!! It then tries to split hairs over the difference between "sovereignty" and "independence"? Aye right!

What Jackie Bird said was a perfectly valid interpretation of Mark Carney's statement and certainly the same meaning that I get from his words.

Stop attacking people who disagree with independence and maybe try addressing the valid concerns they have.
		
Click to expand...

Carney made it perfectly clear all the economic requirements are in place, both north and south of the border for a CU, he did claim that it is not compatible as the unionist parties refuse to consider it, which is their choice.

Here's a question for you Fairway Dodger as you have been consistent and calm in your views.

Scotland votes YES next week. Salmond convenes a team cross party to negotiate with Westminster.He asks for a CU and they say No. Team Scotland ;-) have to decide, do we accept a proportion of the debt without access to a central bank?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Senior guy from Aberdeen Asset Management on R5L just before 9am.  Didn't seem too fussed if there was to be a YES - said Scotland would be a successful country.  Seemed also to say that a move of RBS Registered Head Office to London wouldn't make that much difference as most of the main functions are there already.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Just because Salmond et al can spin black into white doesn't mean the media have to follow suit.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about politicians here, I'm talking about journalism.

RBS/Standard Life: The two main ones have all said today that in the event of YES winning and no CU being in place, they'll move their head offices ( and some aspects of operations) out of Scotland.Significantly different to the story being reported by the media on the whole.

The Telegraph: Shetland/Orkney might want to stay with rUK so you'll have no oil.A complete fabrication of the facts, but the average person on the street isn't as engaged as a few so they'll take that as fact, it's not fact, it's an out and out lie.

John Lewis this very morning: in a few years there might be a slight price differential between Scotland/England : BBC prices to rise in an indy Scotland.A complete fabrication on what the guy said.

There's loads of other examples.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Carney made it perfectly clear all the economic requirements are in place, both north and south of the border for a CU, he did claim that it is not compatible as the unionist parties refuse to consider it, which is their choice.
		
Click to expand...

I listened carefully to what he said more than once and I couldn't align it with folk were saying he said.  I was in truth a little confused - he seemed to me to say that everything was in place for a CU but a CU wouldn't work without the involvement of rUK - that confused me.  Maybe he said things were in place that would enable it to work; economies of two countries were very similar; common interest rates etc etc; any Bank of England decision re interest rates would most likely be OK for Scotland - but to make it work required the commitment of rUK to CU to make it work.

All in all it didn't feel like Carney was given a NO to CU - but I'm not sure TBH


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not talking about politicians here, I'm talking about journalism.

RBS/Standard Life: The two main ones have all said today that in the event of YES winning and no CU being in place, they'll move their head offices ( and some aspects of operations) out of Scotland.Significantly different to the story being reported by the media on the whole.

The Telegraph: Shetland/Orkney might want to stay with rUK so you'll have no oil.A complete fabrication of the facts, but the average person on the street isn't as engaged as a few so they'll take that as fact, it's not fact, it's an out and out lie.

John Lewis this very morning: in a few years there might be a slight price differential between Scotland/England : BBC prices to rise in an indy Scotland.A complete fabrication on what the guy said.

There's loads of other examples.
		
Click to expand...

Totally spot on there Adi.
Dodger, I understand what you are saying and actually agree on a lot of it.

The way the John Lewis interview was reported on BBC national news was disgraceful.

I have always trusted BBC national news until the last few months, lazy biased reporting on their part seem to be the norm now. Sky News is much more balanced.
Folk down south must realise that this unbalanced TV reporting and the fact that only one National British newspaper is pro Union is fueling the Yes Vote for many.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not talking about politicians here, I'm talking about journalism.

RBS/Standard Life: The two main ones have all said today that in the event of YES winning and no CU being in place, they'll move their head offices ( and some aspects of operations) out of Scotland.Significantly different to the story being reported by the media on the whole.

The Telegraph: Shetland/Orkney might want to stay with rUK so you'll have no oil.A complete fabrication of the facts, but the average person on the street isn't as engaged as a few so they'll take that as fact, it's not fact, it's an out and out lie.

John Lewis this very morning: in a few years there might be a slight price differential between Scotland/England : BBC prices to rise in an indy Scotland.A complete fabrication on what the guy said.

There's loads of other examples.
		
Click to expand...

I heard the John Lewis (CE?) this morning on the radio. To me the only concern the guy had was that having separate Scotland and rUK would make it a bit more difficult for the company to maintain it's common pricing where it wanted to do so, and key objective for all JL 'partners' - common working terms and conditions.  But he still said they had plans for expanding there operations in Scotland and did not make any suggestion whatsoever that these would be impacted by a YES


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I listened carefully to what he said more than once and I couldn't align it with folk were saying he said.  I was in truth a little confused - he seemed to me to say that everything was in place for a CU but a CU wouldn't work without the involvement of rUK - that confused me.  Maybe he said things were in place that would enable it to work; economies of two countries were very similar; common interest rates etc etc; any Bank of England decision re interest rates would most likely be OK for Scotland - but to make it work required the commitment of rUK to CU to make it work.

All in all it didn't feel like Carney was given a NO to CU - but I'm not sure TBH 

Click to expand...

you have to hope that Carney is a smart guy and chooses his words very carefully.He was very specific, a CU won't work.The reason he gave was that Westminster rules it out.That's the reason.The only reason.Everything else is in place.Salmond has accepted he'd have to concede setting interest rates, working on the basis that BoE won't do something to harm Scotland that would also harm England.

I'm seriously fed up with the reporting by the main stream, where most folk rely on opinion forming information.It's gross dereliction of duty and nearly Pravda style control of the media by the owners,the govt and the civil service.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Here's a question for you Fairway Dodger as you have been consistent and calm in your views.

Scotland votes YES next week. Salmond convenes a team cross party to negotiate with Westminster.He asks for a CU and they say No. Team Scotland ;-) have to decide, do we accept a proportion of the debt without access to a central bank?
		
Click to expand...

Glad you winked after that "Team Scotland" comment, I'd have pounced on that.... 

I think that is a tough question, to be honest. It certainly seems wrong that iScotland would have to take a share of debt without also retaining the benefits of the central bank. However, morally, a proportion of that debt is ours and should be accepted as such. I also think it would be a very bad start for a newly independent country to "default" on its debts even if it can produce a technical argument justifying the decision.

So, yes, I wouldn't be happy about it but we should accept the debt.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Anyone hear AS on Radio Scotland at 8.30 this morning showing the 'BBC' up for yet another bit of disgracefully lazy journalism?

Wiped the floor.

Their bias is becoming embarrassing. Anyone would think someone is pulling their strings....


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not talking about politicians here, I'm talking about journalism.

RBS/Standard Life: The two main ones have all said today that in the event of YES winning and no CU being in place, they'll move their head offices ( and some aspects of operations) out of Scotland.Significantly different to the story being reported by the media on the whole.

The Telegraph: Shetland/Orkney might want to stay with rUK so you'll have no oil.A complete fabrication of the facts, but the average person on the street isn't as engaged as a few so they'll take that as fact, it's not fact, it's an out and out lie.

John Lewis this very morning: in a few years there might be a slight price differential between Scotland/England : BBC prices to rise in an indy Scotland.A complete fabrication on what the guy said.

There's loads of other examples.
		
Click to expand...

Haven't heard the Shetland or John Lewis stories... (not sure how I've missed them actually) . But what you stated as the RBS/Standard Life statements are exactly what I've heard reported.

EDIT: actually, just saw the "and some aspects of operations" bit. That's not what the BBC were reporting this morning. I heard on Radio Scotland that the RBS announcement did not affect operations or jobs in Scotland.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Glad you winked after that "Team Scotland" comment, I'd have pounced on that.... 

I think that is a tough question, to be honest. It certainly seems wrong that iScotland would have to take a share of debt without also retaining the benefits of the central bank. However, morally, a proportion of that debt is ours and should be accepted as such. I also think it would be a very bad start for a newly independent country to "default" on its debts even if it can produce a technical argument justifying the decision.

So, yes, I wouldn't be happy about it but we should accept the debt.
		
Click to expand...

OK, so lets take it a step further (based on yes winning).Scotland no longer has the Â£ as part of a CU but we're obliged to take 9% of the debt, lets say for the sake of argument Â£135,000,000,000...thats Â£135 Billion of debt we had no say of accumulating, but that's beside the point.

So are we entitled to a % of all the assets of rUK?From military stuff to gold to foreign embassies and the like?Or do we have to take on debt accrued without any discussion with Holyrood, no access to a Â£ we've assisted in creating or central bank we founded and no split of the assets we've invested in?

I'm not having a go btw, I'm just want to know what the opinion is_ if _we vote yes


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not talking about politicians here, I'm talking about journalism.
		
Click to expand...

Many 'journalists' are would-be politicians. There are plenty of politicians that started out as journalists.

However, imo, that's not what any 'proper' front-person should be doing/saying. That's for the 'panel' to debate - or the guest to push. It's also the editorial team that's at fault, not necessarily the front-person.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			OK, so lets take it a step further (based on yes winning).Scotland no longer has the Â£ as part of a CU but we're obliged to take 9% of the debt, lets say for the sake of argument Â£135,000,000,000...thats Â£135 Billion of debt *we had no say of accumulating*, but that's beside the point.

So are we entitled to a % of all the assets of rUK?From military stuff to gold to foreign embassies and the like?Or do we have to take on debt accrued without any discussion with Holyrood, no access to a Â£ we've assisted in creating or central bank we founded and no split of the assets we've invested in?

I'm not having a go btw, I'm just want to know what the opinion is_ if _we vote yes
		
Click to expand...

The bit in bold is one of the many "yes" conceits that annoys me. The westminster government is our government too, we voted for it even if the party we individually voted for didn't win. Much of the debt was run up under the Labour government, which I DID vote for and I assume was a government that even hardened nats would concede Scotland broadly supported. 

Anyway. Yes to debt, yes to a share of the assets.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			The bit in bold is one of the many "yes" conceits that annoys me. The westminster government is our government too, we voted for it even if the party we individually voted for didn't win. Much of the debt was run up under the Labour government, which I DID vote for and I assume was a government that even hardened nats would concede Scotland broadly supported. 

Anyway. Yes to debt, yes to a share of the assets.
		
Click to expand...

I concede your first point, they were elected democratically.I disagree with many of the choices taken, but that's democracy at work.

To your last sentence, excellent! Is the Â£ an asset? Must be.Anyway, here's  a twitter account that's good fun...obviously pro-yes but based on figures obtained from Westminster/Holyrood

https://twitter.com/AssetScotland

fill yer boots!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Many 'journalists' are would-be politicians. There are plenty of politicians that started out as journalists.

However, imo, that's not what any 'proper' front-person should be doing/saying. That's for the 'panel' to debate - or the guest to push. *It's also the editorial team that's at fault, not necessarily the front-person.*

Click to expand...

With TV I'll agree on that.Paper journalism I'm less convinced.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			you have to hope that Carney is a smart guy and chooses his words very carefully.He was very specific, a CU won't work.The reason he gave was that Westminster rules it out.That's the reason.The only reason.Everything else is in place.Salmond has accepted he'd have to concede setting interest rates, working on the basis that BoE won't do something to harm Scotland that would also harm England.
		
Click to expand...

Yes - this is indeed exactly as I understood what he said.  The bit that confused me 'logically' was stating a CU won't work because Westminster rule it out.  But a CU won't *exist *if Westminster rule it out?  But of course there is nothing to stop an iScotland working towards CU - but these CU attempts will fail for as long as Westminster rule it out.  And that's why a CU won't work - it won't work because it won't happen unless Westminster is willing.  I think.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I concede your first point, they were elected democratically.I disagree with many of the choices taken, but that's democracy at work.

To your last sentence, excellent! Is the Â£ an asset? Must be.Anyway, here's  a twitter account that's good fun...obviously pro-yes but based on figures obtained from Westminster/Holyrood

https://twitter.com/AssetScotland

fill yer boots!
		
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. While I'm obviously wanting a "no" vote, if it does go the other way I'll have no choice but to get over it. In which case, I'd be wanting a CU too... in the short term at least. That'd probably be the smoothest path for us initially.

It'd be fascinating watching the fallout on this particular issue. Rarely do politicians state anything so unequivocally as the leaders of the main parties have in ruling out a CU and if the only reason against it is political will (and possibly bad blood in the rUK electorate) it might get interesting.


----------



## Ethan (Sep 11, 2014)

It now seems inevitable that No will win. Not surprising, perhaps. Now I don't have a dog in this fight, I am not Scottish, haven't even been in the place in ages and am not a royalist/loyal Brit either, but the last few days have seen the rather sickening spectacle of the Government panicking about the result, and the public seeing an alliance of Gordon Brown, who sold off the UK gold receives, among other offences, Alistair Darling, enough said, the Orange Order and banks and big business, including some of those who tanked the UK and world economies, lining up to tank the Yes campaign. I wonder how many more honours have been promised in payment. And the Royal Bank of Scotland are threatening to leave the country of their name in the event of a Yes. OK, they are only moving their registered HQ, but that subtlety will be lost on most. Salmond should tell them to sod right off now. 

The Yes campaign is partly romantic and fanciful, and partly political and economic. The No campaign is utterly self serving and cynical. 

If I had a vote, I would be a bit more inclined to vote Yes now than last week.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

Ethan said:



			It now seems inevitable that No will win. Not surprising, perhaps. Now I don't have a dog in this fight, I am not Scottish, haven't even been in the place in ages and am not a royalist/loyal Brit either, but the last few days have seen the rather sickening spectacle of the Government panicking about the result, and the public seeing an alliance of Gordon Brown, who sold off the UK gold receives, among other offences, Alistair Darling, enough said, the Orange Order and banks and big business, including some of those who tanked the UK and world economies, lining up to tank the Yes campaign. I wonder how many more honours have been promised in payment. And the Royal Bank of Scotland are threatening to leave the country of their name in the event of a Yes. OK, they are only moving their registered HQ, but that subtlety will be lost on most. Salmond should tell them to sod right off now. 

The Yes campaign is partly romantic and fanciful, and partly political and economic. The No campaign is utterly self serving and cynical. 

If I had a vote, I would be a bit more inclined to vote Yes now than last week.
		
Click to expand...

Disagree on your first sentence, agree with the rest

I've always held the view where Glasgow leads, Scotland follows and Glasgow is pretty much assured to vote YES.Edinburgh will vote NO, Dundee YES and dunno about Aberdeen tbh.


----------



## lex! (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Disagree on your first sentence, agree with the rest

*I've always held the view where Glasgow leads, Scotland follows *and Glasgow is pretty much assured to vote YES.Edinburgh will vote NO, Dundee YES and dunno about Aberdeen tbh.
		
Click to expand...

Oh No! Please. Pass the bucket. What about the Borders, or could you not give a s..


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Disagree on your first sentence, agree with the rest

I've always held the view where Glasgow leads, Scotland follows and Glasgow is pretty much assured to vote YES.Edinburgh will vote NO, Dundee YES and dunno about Aberdeen tbh.
		
Click to expand...

I think Aberdeen could vote YES - but I admit that that view is simply based upon the intentions of my brother and his family.  He is a successful and well-off professional senior civil engineer contractor working in the oil industry and living in Aberdeen.  He is married and has two teenagers, and rather 'conservative' with his money   ...and he supports Rangers ...

If you could profile a NO voter he would be a NO voter.  They are all voting YES.  And he says that many of his civil engineer mates are also YES.  I was a bit surprised I have to say.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

lex! said:



			Oh No! Please. Pass the bucket. What about the Borders, or could you not give a s..
		
Click to expand...

Not sure I understand.I've lived my entire life in Edinburgh but recognise the role Glasgow plays in forming Scottish thinking.It's the largest city, probably the most 'turned on' politically and easily the most vocal!

I'm heading down to my wee holiday home outside Gatehouse tomorrow and expect to have some lively conversations with my neighbours down that way.Looking forward to unplugging from the cyber debate tonight and just talking over a beer or ten.


----------



## lex! (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Not sure I understand.I've lived my entire life in Edinburgh but recognise the role Glasgow plays in forming Scottish thinking.It's the largest city, probably the most 'turned on' politically and easily the most vocal!

I'm heading down to my wee holiday home outside Gatehouse tomorrow and expect to have some lively conversations with my neighbours down that way.Looking forward to unplugging from the cyber debate tonight and just talking over a beer or ten.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, it just sounded so arrogant and was probably put there to provoke a reaction and i bit straight away. Enjoy your beers. I don't have a vote any more but would be NO for me. My old man will be voting NO, as will be his neighbours he told me. My best mate is already looking to sell up and buy a place in Newcastle so he can still be near his folks. He's very worried.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

lex! said:



			Sorry, it just sounded so arrogant and was probably put there to provoke a reaction and i bit straight away. Enjoy your beers. I don't have a vote any more but would be NO for me. My old man will be voting NO, as will be his neighbours he told me. My best mate is already looking to sell up and buy a place in Newcastle so he can still be near his folks. He's very worried.
		
Click to expand...

If I wanted a reaction I would post something alot different from what I perceive as the truth.Glasgow leads, the rest of us follow.

As for your best mate, he's looking to sell up and buy in Newcastle so he can still be near his folks? How would he be further away from his folks if YES wins? That's seriously dumb thinking your mate has.


----------



## chrisd (Sep 11, 2014)

Lets face it, now all the negative stuff is coming out ie companies moving to London, no chance of a currency deal, EU membership difficulties etc etc  the undecided will revert to type and not want to change the status quo "to be on the safe side"

The biggest factor though is the argument that what you people decide next week is forever and if you get it badly wrong there is no going back which could seriously harm your future generations


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

lex! said:



			Sorry, it just sounded so arrogant and was probably put there to provoke a reaction and i bit straight away. Enjoy your beers. I don't have a vote any more but would be NO for me. My old man will be voting NO, as will be his neighbours he told me. My best mate is already looking to sell up and buy a place in Newcastle so he can still be near his folks. He's very worried.
		
Click to expand...

The Borders will be a NO.

Do you have a tie to the Borders?


----------



## lex! (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If I wanted a reaction I would post something alot different from what I perceive as the truth.*Glasgow leads, the rest of us follow.

*As for your best mate, he's looking to sell up and buy in Newcastle so he can still be near his folks? How would he be further away from his folks if YES wins? That's seriously dumb thinking your mate has.
		
Click to expand...

Grrrr.. Squirm....thought i mentioned bigotry, but i think i got away with it.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

lex! said:



			Grrrr.. Squirm....thought i mentioned bigotry, but i think i got away with it.
		
Click to expand...

This opinion seems to have riled a few and I can't see why? Glasgow was considered the second city of the British Empire, it's the bedrock of The Labour Party, it's ships are world renowned, it stood up for Mandela before any other city in the world iirc and it's politically active, much more so than any other Scottish city.

I stand by my assertion


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 11, 2014)

lex! said:



			Grrrr.. Squirm....thought i mentioned bigotry, but i think i got away with it.
		
Click to expand...

so in your opinion the Borders lead and Scoland Follows???

That must be the reason the Borders has Scotlands  only Tory MP


----------



## Ethan (Sep 11, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Lets face it, now *all the negative stuff* is coming out ie companies moving to London, no chance of a currency deal, EU membership difficulties etc etc  the undecided will revert to type and not want to change the status quo "to be on the safe side"

The biggest factor though is the argument that what you people decide next week is forever and if you get it badly wrong there is no going back which could seriously harm your future generations
		
Click to expand...

The negative stuff wins elections. It has been proven time and time again. Threats have more impact than promises. 

Seems like Cameron et al haven't taken the threat of a loss adequately seriously until very recently, so as a panic measure have persuaded their mates in the City to throw in their tuppence worth. Which, funnily enough, is just about the amount of tax they pay too.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Not sure I understand.I've lived my entire life in Edinburgh but recognise the role Glasgow plays in forming Scottish thinking.It's the largest city, probably the most 'turned on' politically and easily the most vocal!

I'm heading down to my wee holiday home outside Gatehouse tomorrow and expect to have some lively conversations with my neighbours down that way.Looking forward to unplugging from the cyber debate tonight and just talking over a beer or ten.
		
Click to expand...

The thing about Glasgow is that due to the massive influx of Highlanders and folks from rural communities across Scotland that happened following the clearances and during the Industrial Revolution, we have today a Glaswegian who in many ways has inherited and developed many social and cultural influences indicative of the Highlander and rural Scot in general.  Some say that that is why the Glaswegian is found to be the friendly, social(ist) individual he is.  And maybe is why Glasgow is more than just an industrial commercial city - it is a city whose people think in ways that reflect those of much of Scotland.


----------



## lex! (Sep 11, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			so in your opinion the Borders lead and Scoland Follows???

That must be the reason the Borders has Scotlands only Tory MP

Click to expand...

And your point is?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

lex! said:



			And your point is?
		
Click to expand...

That the borders are really quite strange and unique in Scottish society? And I know that to be true as I spend a significant amount of time in Galloway.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			That the borders are really quite strange and unique in Scottish society? And I know that to be true as I spend a significant amount of time in Galloway.
		
Click to expand...

Galloway? Borders?

Lowlands surely? I always see 'The Borders as Hawick and east.


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 11, 2014)

lex! said:



			And your point is?
		
Click to expand...

the point is you appear to have gotten angry as my learned friend mentioned that Glasgow might lead as Scotland's Largest City. and then brought up the borders!!!!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Galloway? Borders?

Lowlands surely? I always see 'The Borders as Hawick and east.
		
Click to expand...

Oh, don't tell them that - the border goes all the way across.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 11, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			my learned friend
		
Click to expand...

There has been a lot of guff and nonsense spoken on this thread, but now you're really pushing it!  
:thup:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Galloway? Borders?

Lowlands surely? I always see 'The Borders as Hawick and east.
		
Click to expand...


hmmm, never thought if it like that.But you could be correct.I always consider Dumfries/Galloway as border regions.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			hmmm, never thought if it like that.But you could be correct.I always consider Dumfries/Galloway as border regions.
		
Click to expand...

I became more aware of Dodger's interpretation after I moved to Edinburgh but, with my roots from Galloway, I always considered it to be the borders too. And they get "Borders" telly. Poor them!


----------



## lex! (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			That the borders are really quite strange and unique in Scottish society? And I know that to be true as I spend a significant amount of time in Galloway.
		
Click to expand...

Er hello Glasgow, Galloway isn't in the Borders, it's in Galloway.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I became more aware of Dodger's interpretation after I moved to Edinburgh but, with my roots from Galloway, I always considered it to be the borders too. And they get "Borders" telly. Poor them!
		
Click to expand...

I've got a wee but n ben at Carrick shore near Gatehouse...no TV allowed by decree of grandparents/parents....get out and enjoy the bloody fields and beaches!No internet too, if anything significant happens over the weekend I'll be none the wiser, which is very liberating.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

interesting

http://theconversation.com/scotland-will-not-be-offered-devo-max-after-a-no-vote-heres-why-31500


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've got a wee but n ben at Carrick shore near Gatehouse...no TV allowed by decree of grandparents/parents....get out and enjoy the bloody fields and beaches!No internet too, if anything significant happens over the weekend I'll be none the wiser, which is very liberating.
		
Click to expand...

So you'll be hoping for a wee deoch an doris next week then

Just a wee deoch an doris, just a wee drop, that's all. 
Just a wee deoch an doris afore ye gang awa. 
There's a wee wifie waitin' in a wee but an ben. 
If you can say, "It's a braw bricht moonlicht nicht", 
Then yer a'richt, ye ken.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

A record 4,285,323 people have registered to vote...Scotland, take a bow.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A record 4,285,323 people have registered to vote...Scotland, take a bow.
		
Click to expand...

Could be a first for me.... queuing at the polling station!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...o-hear-the-truth-about-his-defence-plans.html


----------



## DCB (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A record 4,285,323 people have registered to vote...Scotland, take a bow.
		
Click to expand...

+1

Staggering numbers. I just hope all those newly registered voters stay on the Roll and make their voice heard at future elections whatever the outcome of this current event.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...o-hear-the-truth-about-his-defence-plans.html

Click to expand...

Hardly an 'unbiased' writer - a Conservative MP - in a distinctly pro-Union newspaper!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

DCB said:



			+1

Staggering numbers. I just hope all those newly registered voters stay on the Roll and make their voice heard at future elections whatever the outcome of this current event.
		
Click to expand...

97% of the electorate.IF even 80% come out and vote YES wins I think.If its over 90% I predict 60%+ victory.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Hardly an 'unbiased' writer - a Conservative MP - in a distinctly pro-Union newspaper!
		
Click to expand...

I read the Telegraph everyday, it's sports section is the best about I think.It's coverage of this entire campaign has been nothing short of scandalous.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A record 4,285,323 people have registered to vote...Scotland, take a bow.
		
Click to expand...

Staggering figure..............I think they said 200,000 had already voted.

I know that they were queuing to register.
Well done Scotland.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Hardly an 'unbiased' writer - a Conservative MP - in a distinctly pro-Union newspaper!
		
Click to expand...


There has been unbiased writing on both sides of the campaign 

Calling it unbiased won't change any facts though


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I read the Telegraph everyday, it's sports section is the best about I think.It's coverage of this entire campaign has been nothing short of scandalous.
		
Click to expand...

Because they are pro union - no doubt the feeling would be different if they were pro independent


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A record 4,285,323 people have registered to vote...Scotland, take a bow.
		
Click to expand...

Now *that* is mighty impressive


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

To continue along the strand of The BBC being somewhat one-sided,have a look.

[video=youtube;rHmLb-RIbrM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHmLb-RIbrM[/video]


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

Wow.....BBC in the dock


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Seems Salmond still dismisses any negative reports from businesses and banks as scaremongering as opposed to being an actual problem


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Seems Salmond still dismisses any negative reports from businesses and banks as scaremongering as opposed to being an actual problem
		
Click to expand...

Yet to see the YES vote reply to anything substantial? As seen on this thread, it's better to cast aspersions on the person writing it, or where it's written, or how it's written, as opposed to what is actually written


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

So guys and gals what do think of the UK Treasury briefing Nick Robinson from the BBC on the RBS statement before it's announcement ?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So guys and gals what do think of the UK Treasury briefing Nick Robinson from the BBC on the RBS statement before it's announcement ?
		
Click to expand...

And ? Think nothing of it 

Makes zero difference to the content of the briefing which is the important part surely ?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So guys and gals what do think of the UK Treasury briefing Nick Robinson from the BBC on the RBS statement before it's announcement ?
		
Click to expand...

I think The BBC should be praying for a NO vote, they're finished in an independent Scotland I think.As for the briefing, that'll be swept under the carpet.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

Despite the fact that it breaks fairly significant financial regulations. Surely not


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I think The BBC should be praying for a NO vote, they're finished in an independent Scotland I think.As for the briefing, that'll be swept under the carpet.
		
Click to expand...


How can a telly company be "finished" in a country 

Are you suggesting enough people will not watch the BBC or listen to BBC radio all because of the way they report the Independence ?!

Well just looking at it - currently according to the polls just over half will vote NO so that's around 2.2 million who will prob still watch the BBC - add in all those yes voters who tune in to watch Strictly or Eastenders or all those other entertainment programmes which the general public watch will prob push that number higher - to say they are "finished" in an Independent Scotland is laughable


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Despite the fact that it breaks fairly significant financial regulations. Surely not

Click to expand...


So I'm guessing it's another case of ignoring the actual content of the briefing ( because it more than likely paints a negative picture towards a yes vote ) but concentrating on something else - soon the fingers will be all the way in the ears


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Will the British Biased Corporation show the First Minister's talk today to the whole of the Scottish people in its entirety tonight I wonder?

Or will it just be wee snippets as a lip jester to suit their masters?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Will the British Biased Corporation show the First Minister's talk today to the whole of the Scottish people in its entirety tonight I wonder?

Or will it just be wee snippets as a lip jester to suit their masters?
		
Click to expand...

When do they ever show any politician's speech in its entirety? 

Quite taken aback by the levels of paranoia about alleged "bias".


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			When do they ever show any politician's speech in its entirety? 

Quite taken aback by the levels of paranoia about alleged "bias".
		
Click to expand...

The paranoia allows the facts to be ignored 

I wonder what the feeling would be if the BBC reported positively towards the Yes campaign.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The paranoia allows the facts to be ignored 

I wonder what the feeling would be if the BBC reported positively towards the Yes campaign.
		
Click to expand...

It is not paranoia. I am merely stating that the reporting has been ill informed and heavily leaning towards NO so much so that the 'news' that they are giving out is on many occasions factually incorrect.

Should a National Broadcaster not be trusted to report things correctly no?

I am sure that you had issues with a certain red top that spouted crap about a people from a certain city and rightly so.

To expect a broadcaster to broadcast correct info is surely not asking too much....no?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Which "facts" have the BBC reported that are incorrect ? Or which information that isn't factually correct has been broadcast ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So I'm guessing it's another case of ignoring the actual content of the briefing ( because it more than likely paints a negative picture towards a yes vote ) but concentrating on something else - soon the fingers will be all the way in the ears
		
Click to expand...

Hmmm not sure if you should be taking such a cavalier attitude to breaking the law. Which obviously paints a poor picture of the No Camp. The statement would have been released in due time so no difference.
Think you have missed the point

Are you aware down south that iScotland will probably do away with the BBC.
Gives them a motive.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			It is not paranoia. I am merely stating that the reporting has been ill informed and heavily leaning towards NO so much so that the 'news' that they are giving out is on many occasions factually incorrect.

Should a National Broadcaster not be trusted to report things correctly no?

I am sure that you had issues with a certain red top that spouted crap about a people from a certain city and rightly so.

To expect a broadcaster to broadcast correct info is surely not asking too much....no?
		
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing but for peace and harmony I did not post.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Hmmm not sure if you should be taking such a cavalier attitude to braking the law. Which obviously paints a poor picture of the No Camp. The statement would have been released in due time so no difference.
Think you have missed the point

Are you aware down south that iScotland will probably do away with the BBC.
Gives them a motive.
		
Click to expand...

Where has it been suggested that Scotland will "do away" with the BBC - will Scotland then start producing their own programmes - funded from what ? 

What law has been broken ?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Hmmm not sure if you should be taking such a cavalier attitude to breaking the law. Which obviously paints a poor picture of the No Camp. The statement would have been released in due time so no difference.
Think you have missed the point

Are you aware down south that iScotland will probably do away with the BBC.
Gives them a motive.
		
Click to expand...

DfT, could you for one second just ignore the rule breaking (unless LPP knows people inside the media, he is unlikely to know why it was leaked early), and deal with the substance behind the announcement. You're doing really really well at avoiding any facts or issues, and just attacking how it is published/the BBC, but it would be really nice to hear comments on the things that actually matter.


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 11, 2014)

Old Salmond looked like the cat who'd got the cream the other day when they briefly went ahead in the polls.
Gives me the creeps that fella.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			DfT, could you for one second just ignore the rule breaking (unless LPP knows people inside the media, he is unlikely to know why it was leaked early), and deal with the substance behind the announcement. *You're doing really really well at avoiding any facts or issues, and just attacking how it is published/the BBC, but it would be really nice to hear comments on the things that actually matter*.
		
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be a massive change from the Yes campaign ? It seems it months of avoiding the issues and facts and going with the "scaremongering" line


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Which "facts" have the BBC reported that are incorrect ? Or which information that isn't factually correct has been broadcast ?
		
Click to expand...

Lloyds moving head office lies.

RBS news being portrayed as a disaster when in reality it's not.

Interrupted a crucial speech from AS to cover Oscar fecking Pistorious.


And that is just today.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			It is not paranoia. I am merely stating that the reporting has been ill informed and heavily leaning towards NO so much so that the 'news' that they are giving out is on many occasions factually incorrect.

Should a National Broadcaster not be trusted to report things correctly no?

I am sure that you had issues with a certain red top that spouted crap about a people from a certain city and rightly so.

To expect a broadcaster to broadcast correct info is surely not asking too much....no?
		
Click to expand...

scrub


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Which "facts" have the BBC reported that are incorrect ? Or which information that isn't factually correct has been broadcast ?
		
Click to expand...


I have BBC News channel on much of day - and the summary headlines that put at the bottom of the screen are often inaccurate. 

So for instance on John Lewis the headline has been along lines of 'John Lewis warn of *hike* in prices in Scotland following a YES'  Now the boss of JL did not use the word hike - that is an editorial interpretation of the statement JL made that has very obvious 'big increase' and hence strong negative connotations  In fact in the interview with the JL boss that I heard he didn't sound too concerned - some issues but not a big deal for him


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Interrupted a crucial speech from AS to cover Oscar fecking Pistorious.
		
Click to expand...

If they took AS off the screen, I think they deserve a big round of applause.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Lloyds moving head office lies.

RBS news being portrayed as a disaster when in reality it's not.

Interrupted a crucial speech from AS to cover Oscar fecking Pistorious.


And that is just today.
		
Click to expand...

Didn't the Scottish Herald also report that Lloyds possibly moving head office ?

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...s-to-move-hqs-south-after-yes-vote.1410390981

RBS disaster ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29151798

And reckon the Pistouris news is big news and the BBC cover the whole of the UK and the world and the breaking verdict is massive news 

So overall the BBC paranoia is exactly what it is - paranoia because it's being negative slightly towards a yes vote but don't seem to be publishing many incorrect facts


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			scrub
		
Click to expand...


Que?


----------



## delc (Sep 11, 2014)

I am curious to know why Salmond & Co want to keep the UK Pound?  Surely if they want Scotland to be fully independent and in charge of its own destiny, they should start up a new currency and a new National Regulating Bank. They already print their own bank notes anyway (which are viewed with rather a lot of suspicion in Southern England)!  Otherwise Scotland will always be under the control of the Bank of England. Perhaps the new currency could be called the Scottish Pound, the Scottish Dollar, or The Haggis!


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Didn't the Scottish Herald also report that Lloyds possibly moving head office ?

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...s-to-move-hqs-south-after-yes-vote.1410390981

RBS disaster ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29151798

And reckon the Pistouris news is big news and the BBC cover the whole of the UK and the world and the breaking verdict is massive news 

So overall the BBC paranoia is exactly what it is - paranoia because it's being negative slightly towards a yes vote but don't seem to be publishing many incorrect facts
		
Click to expand...

Disaster? No, not at all.not a disaster at all.

Big news, in Britain.

Ok I get it you don't like to be proved wrong.:smirk:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I have BBC News channel on much of day - and the summary headlines that put at the bottom of the screen are often inaccurate. 

So for instance on John Lewis the headline has been along lines of 'John Lewis warn of *hike* in prices in Scotland following a YES'  Now the boss of JL did not use the word hike - that is an editorial interpretation of the statement JL made that has very obvious 'big increase' and hence strong negative connotations  In fact in the interview with the JL boss that I heard he didn't sound too concerned - some issues but not a big deal for him
		
Click to expand...

Hold the press - BBC join every single other news or media outlet who have a headline that isn't exactly what is part of the main body

It's absolutely hilarious the tenuous links people are trying to grab to ignore the actual issues

Attacking the BBC :rofl:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Disaster? No, not at all.not a disaster at all.

Big news, in Britain.

Ok I get it you don't like to be proved wrong.:smirk:
		
Click to expand...

You haven't proved me wrong 

Just shown you articles that dismiss your claims 

Still waiting for the incorrect facts being shown - that's facts not opinions 

I'll shall no doubt wait a while. 

And yes Oscar Pistorious verdict news is massive news - regardless of what you believe.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			If they took AS off the screen, I think they deserve a big round of applause.
		
Click to expand...

which isn't actually very funny and some might find a bit insulting...

and rather shows BBC sense of priorities and newsworthiness.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			which isn't actually very funny and some might find a bit insulting...

and rather shows BBC sense of priorities and newsworthiness.
		
Click to expand...


Every single major news outlet in the world was broadcasting the Oscar Verdict including Sky , ITV and BBC news 

It is major worldwide news - and it was live.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You haven't proved me wrong 

Just shown you articles that dismiss your claims 

Still waiting for the incorrect facts being shown - that's facts not opinions 

I'll shall no doubt wait a while. 

And yes Oscar Pistorious verdict news is massive news - regardless of what you believe.
		
Click to expand...

So Lloyds are moving head office then?

RBS Moving has no affect jobs wise which is what was portrayed by the BBC.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			which isn't actually very funny and some might find a bit insulting...

and rather shows BBC sense of priorities and newsworthiness.
		
Click to expand...

Seeing as a number of the YES voters on here have even said they woudl much prefer AS wasn't leading the YES campaign, I don't see it as that insulting.

And anyway, I think the BBC have been massively biased, they have given AS loads more publicity than the NO vote.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			RBS Moving has no affect jobs wise which is what was portrayed by the BBC.
		
Click to expand...

Not on the broadcast I heard this morning.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Not on the broadcast I heard this morning.
		
Click to expand...

From RBS themselves...

http://www.rbs.com/news/2014/09/statement-in-response-to-press-speculation-on-re-domicile.html


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			So Lloyds are moving head office then?

RBS Moving has no affect jobs wise which is what was portrayed by the BBC.
		
Click to expand...



This is what the BBC have on their website in regards Lloyds

Lloyds Banking Group, Tesco Bank, Clydesdale Bank and TSB have also been setting out their post-referendum contingency plans.

Lloyds Banking Group said it could shift its legal home to its headquarters, which is already in London.

However, Lloyds said this was just a legal procedure and "there would be no immediate changes or issues".

The statement from Lloyds said: "Lloyds Banking Group has seen an increased level of enquiries from our customers, colleagues and other stakeholders about our plans post the Scottish referendum.

"While the scale of potential change is currently unclear, we have contingency plans in place which include the establishment of new legal entities in England. This is a legal procedure and there would be no immediate changes or issues which could affect our business or our customers.

Also within the same report I can't see anything about Job losses being reported by the BBC

Unless I have missed it 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29151798


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Every single major news outlet in the world was broadcasting the Oscar Verdict including Sky , ITV and BBC news 

It is major worldwide news - and it was live.
		
Click to expand...

..and so important that we couldn't wait until AS had finished?  Nope.  Not when we have the debate on the future of our country going into it's final week and at a crucial point.  Most of the UK population will be quite happy finding out about Pistorius trial when they get home from work or whatever.  COuld have put positotius trial as strapline


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			From RBS themselves...

http://www.rbs.com/news/2014/09/statement-in-response-to-press-speculation-on-re-domicile.html

Click to expand...

Not sure why you posted that. My point is that the BBC this morning accurately reported that the RBS move would have no impact on operations or jobs in Scotland.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			..and so important that we couldn't wait until AS had finished?  Nope.  Not when we have the debate on the future of our country going into it's final week and at a crucial point.  Most of the UK population will be quite happy finding out about Pistorius trial when they get home from work or whatever.  COuld have put positotius trial as strapline
		
Click to expand...

I bet you more of the UK population were interested in the Pistorius verdict than yet another Salmond speech.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			So Lloyds are moving head office then?

RBS Moving has no affect jobs wise which is what was portrayed by the BBC.
		
Click to expand...




FairwayDodger said:



			Not on the broadcast I heard this morning.
		
Click to expand...




ger147 said:



			From RBS themselves...

http://www.rbs.com/news/2014/09/statement-in-response-to-press-speculation-on-re-domicile.html

Click to expand...

I can't see anywhere in that statement where it says it will have no effect on jobs. Says that the services for customers won't be affected but doesn't mention jobs in a positive or negative way.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			..and so important that we couldn't wait until AS had finished?  Nope.  Not when we have the debate on the future of our country going into it's final week and at a crucial point.  Most of the UK population will be quite happy finding out about Pistorius trial when they get home from work or whatever.  COuld have put positotius trial as strapline
		
Click to expand...

The BBC supplies pictures around the world that look after the whole of the UK and it's citizens around not just the Scottish and with IMO most of England/Wales and N Ireland happy to read what Salmond has to say later then they would prefer to see the Worldwide breaking news 

I'm guessing Sky News must also be biased towards the No vote as well as they immediately went to the Oscar News as well - As did BFBS and ITV news

But the fact you believe that what Salmond has to say is more important just goes to show the level of arrogance being displayed by certain fractions of the Yes campaign


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			This is what the BBC have on their website in regards Lloyds

Lloyds Banking Group, Tesco Bank, Clydesdale Bank and TSB have also been setting out their post-referendum contingency plans.

Lloyds Banking Group said it could shift its legal home to its headquarters, which is already in London.

However, Lloyds said this was just a legal procedure and "there would be no immediate changes or issues".

The statement from Lloyds said: "Lloyds Banking Group has seen an increased level of enquiries from our customers, colleagues and other stakeholders about our plans post the Scottish referendum.

"While the scale of potential change is currently unclear, we have contingency plans in place which include the establishment of new legal entities in England. This is a legal procedure and there would be no immediate changes or issues which could affect our business or our customers.

Also within the same report I can't see anything about Job losses being reported by the BBC

Unless I have missed it 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29151798

Click to expand...

That has been changed after AS pointed out their glaring faux pas at 8.30am this morning.

All that was reported was 'Moving head quarters to London'.

The head office has been in London for 110 years or something like that.

Some really poor journalism has been made by them.

Instead of the  "RBS confirms 'Yes' vote London move" scare tactic headline a headline of "RBS confirms 'Yes' vote will not result in loss of jobs" would have been suffice but that would not have had the desired scare tactic effect.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Instead of the  "RBS confirms 'Yes' vote London move" scare tactic headline a headline of "RBS confirms 'Yes' vote will not result in loss of jobs" would have been suffice but that would not have had the desired scare tactic effect.
		
Click to expand...

I think you missed your calling in life of "snappy headline creator".


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			That has been changed after AS pointed out their glaring faux pas at 8.30am this morning.

All that was reported was 'Moving head quarters to London'.

The head office has been in London for 110 years or something like that.

Some really poor journalism has been made by them.

Instead of the  "RBS confirms 'Yes' vote London move" scare tactic headline a headline of "RBS confirms 'Yes' vote will not result in loss of jobs" would have been suffice but that would not have had the desired scare tactic effect.
		
Click to expand...


But the headline - RBS confirms Yes vote London move isn't factually incorrect is it ? 

You may not like the headline but it is still factually correct 

Banks and businesses look like they are making provisions to possibly have some parts or all part of the presence in Scotland leave if there is a yes vote 

Now the Yes campaign are concentrating on how that is broadcast without actually tackling the fact that banks and businesses could be leaving the country because of the vote - instead of looking at the repurcussions of that happening it's being ignored as per usual


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

ColchesterFC said:



			I can't see anywhere in that statement where it says it will have no effect on jobs. Says that the services for customers won't be affected but doesn't mention jobs in a positive or negative way.
		
Click to expand...

The last sentence...

"RBS intends to retain a significant level of its operations and employment in Scotland to support its customers there and the activities of the whole Bank."


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I bet you more of the UK population were interested in the Pistorius verdict than yet another Salmond speech.
		
Click to expand...

Was it not an international media news conference - not a speech as such.  Interesting to hear questions coming from other thanthe usual suspects.  Anyway.  It's done and gone.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

This is a dangerous situation.
The BBC is misreporting in favour of the No campaign. Of that there can be no doubt.
UP to a couple of months ago I was a massive BBC fan and now I simply cannot believe what I am seeing.

They are trying to protect the jobs and salaries of colleagues as Scotland would move to a much more cost effective broadcasting system.

Time for them to go IMO. 
Whether it is a Yes or NO vote.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Was it not an international media news conference - not a speech as such.  Interesting to hear questions coming from other thanthe usual suspects.  Anyway.  It's done and gone.
		
Click to expand...

No idea - I wasn't watching. (but I did check the Pistorius verdict online  )


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			This is a dangerous situation.
The BBC is misreporting in favour of the No campaign. Of that there can be no doubt.
UP to a couple of months ago I was a massive BBC fan and now I simply cannot believe what I am seeing.

They are trying to protect the jobs and salaries of colleagues as Scotland would move to a much more cost effective broadcasting system.

Time for them to go IMO. 
Whether it is a Yes or NO vote.
		
Click to expand...

Doon, for the record, I doubt it. I doubt it very much.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			This is a dangerous situation.
The BBC is misreporting in favour of the No campaign. Of that there can be no doubt.
UP to a couple of months ago I was a massive BBC fan and now I simply cannot believe what I am seeing.

They are trying to protect the jobs and salaries of colleagues as Scotland would move to a much more cost effective broadcasting system.

Time for them to go IMO. 
Whether it is a Yes or NO vote.
		
Click to expand...

"Time for them to go". 

Who exactly should go 

Don't forget that every other media outlet is reporting pretty much the same thing as they are - Sky , ITV - should they go as well

In fact should everyone who reports negatively in regards a Yes vote should go also ?! 

How exactly is it "dangerous" ?!


----------



## ColchesterFC (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			The last sentence...

"RBS intends to retain a significant level of its operations and employment in Scotland to support its customers there and the activities of the whole Bank."
		
Click to expand...

So do we agree that there will be job losses? Probably not massive numbers but at least some as they are only committing to a "significant level" rather than saying all.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			This is a dangerous situation.
The BBC is misreporting in favour of the No campaign. Of that there can be no doubt.
UP to a couple of months ago I was a massive BBC fan and now I simply cannot believe what I am seeing.

They are trying to protect the jobs and salaries of colleagues as Scotland would move to a much more cost effective broadcasting system.

Time for them to go IMO. 
Whether it is a Yes or NO vote.
		
Click to expand...

Hi dft

Just a quick one, not sure if you saw my reply on the page before, lots of comments since then!

I was just wondering if you could pass opinion on the things being reported, rather than the way they are reported. Haven't really seen much from the YES side about that. 

I wouldn't worry about the BBC. If you do go independent, they would probably make just as much money by leaving Scotland, and selling you Strictly Come Dancing, Top Gear and all the other shows that you all love so much. And think of all the money they could save by not having to send reporters up to Edinburgh or Glasgow to report on events!


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

I have absolutely no way to corroborate my post but my wife has just told me that her friends daughter who is going to the 16 and 17 year olds debate on BBC tonight has been asked to be a No or an Undecided tonight as there are too many Yes's in the audience.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I have absolutely no way to corroborate my post but my wife has just told me that her friends daughter who is going to the 16 and 17 year olds debate on BBC tonight has been asked to be a No or an Undecided tonight as there are too many Yes's in the audience.
		
Click to expand...

Hmmm, seems unlikely but, if true, it certainly gives the lie to any accusations of pro-no bias.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Hi dft

Just a quick one, not sure if you saw my reply on the page before, lots of comments since then!

I was just wondering if you could pass opinion on the things being reported, rather than the way they are reported. Haven't really seen much from the YES side about that. 

I wouldn't worry about the BBC. If you do go independent, they would probably make just as much money by leaving Scotland, and selling you Strictly Come Dancing, Top Gear and all the other shows that you all love so much. And think of all the money they could save by not having to send reporters up to Edinburgh or Glasgow to report on events! 



Click to expand...

When a lot of folk watch and listen to BBC News bulletins it is surely very important that things are reported accurately and not editorialised without care for 'ease of understanding' or whatever purpose.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			When a lot of folk watch and listen to BBC News bulletins it is surely very important that things are reported accurately and not editorialised without care for 'ease of understanding' or whatever purpose.
		
Click to expand...

Doesn't that apply to every single news outlet in the world 

The BBC certainly aren't the only News outlet in the world who don't glamourised headlines but the content will be no different to every single other news outlet 

They were accused of broadcasting incorrect facts and factually incorrect statements - still not seen the evidence to back that


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

ColchesterFC said:



			So do we agree that there will be job losses? Probably not massive numbers but at least some as they are only committing to a "significant level" rather than saying all.
		
Click to expand...

The statement makes no mention of job losses.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Doesn't that apply to every single news outlet in the world 

The BBC certainly aren't the only News outlet in the world who don't glamourised headlines but the content will be no different to every single other news outlet 

They were accused of broadcasting incorrect facts and factually incorrect statements - still not seen the evidence to back that
		
Click to expand...

Did I not give an example of exaggerating or hyping up potential cost increases by JL.  I concede that I have not been able to check back on all statements made by the JL boss this morning as he may have used the word 'hike' in respect of prices in a statement that I didn't hear.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			The statement makes no mention of job losses.
		
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that will be down to interpretation 

Maybe it's more about what they are not saying 

Ie they arent saying that all staff will remain in place but instead "a significant presence" will remain


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Hmmm, seems unlikely but, if true, it certainly gives the lie to any accusations of pro-no bias.
		
Click to expand...

Strikes me as shoddy preparation as it's normal to have a balance in the audience for any such programme, but having failed to prepare properly by ensuring there is a balance, it's very poor form to ask people to lie for the sake of a TV programme when the subject matter is supposed to be factual and of such importance.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Did I not give an example of exaggerating or hyping up potential cost increases by JL.  I concede that I have not been able to check back on all statements made by the JL boss this morning as he may have used the word 'hike' in respect of prices in a statement that I didn't hear.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29153022

Anything factual incorrect in this report from the BBC


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I'm guessing that will be down to interpretation 

Maybe it's more about what they are not saying 

Ie they arent saying that all staff will remain in place but instead "a significant presence" will remain
		
Click to expand...

I'm not interpreting anything, merely providing a link to what RBS are actually saying themselves.  They have made no mention of job losses.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			The statement makes no mention of job losses.
		
Click to expand...

By implication retaining a "significant level" rather than for instance "retaining all" or "retaining our current level" indicates a reduction in numbers.


----------



## Val (Sep 11, 2014)

Is it a fair assumption that if the major companies mentioned move their head office to England they effectively become and English company and pay their taxes to the rUK government?

If so how does the Scottish Government plan to make up this taxation shortfall?

Or will I get the token response of it being lies and it won't happen anyway?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I'm not interpreting anything, merely providing a link to what RBS are actually saying themselves.  They have made no mention of job losses.
		
Click to expand...


I know your not interpreting anything 

Was more about how others could interpret the statement to mean that there will be job losses even though that's not been mentioned directly


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

This will get dirtier and dirtier as the week goes on....filthy in fact.

Cameron will be contacting all and sundry to get them to put out any scare story that might swing it.

Supermarket chiefs next.


----------



## Val (Sep 11, 2014)

As for much Scotland ditching the BBC, does that included BBC radio too? So no licence fee and again no revenue.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

ColchesterFC said:



			By implication retaining a "significant level" rather than for instance "retaining all" or "retaining our current level" indicates a reduction in numbers.
		
Click to expand...

No it doesn't.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Is it a air assumption that if the major companies mentioned move their head office to England they effectively become and English company and pay their taxes to the rUK government?

If so how does the Scottish Government plan to make up this taxation shortfall?

Or will I get the token response of it being lies and it won't happen anyway?
		
Click to expand...

Scaremongering will be the reply 

I heard on the radio that someone has mentioned 20 thousand jobs will be created if a yes vote happens - but no one knows exactly what these jobs will be and why those jobs aren't being done right now by someone ?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			As for much Scotland ditching the BBC, does that included BBC radio too? So no licence fee and again no revenue.
		
Click to expand...


Public would need to fund a national broadcaster. 

Would possibly be higher than what we pay


----------



## ColchesterFC (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			No it doesn't.
		
Click to expand...

Without wishing to sink to your level of debate.........

Oh yes it does.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

ColchesterFC said:



			Without wishing to sink to your level of debate.........

Oh yes it does. 

Click to expand...

It could be interpreted that way but it could also be interpreted that RBS currently has a significant level of its operations in Scotland and it intends to retain a significant level of its operations in Scotland i.e. no change at all.

So in summary, no it doesn't, not necessarily.


----------



## Val (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Public would need to fund a national broadcaster. 

Would possibly be higher than what we pay
		
Click to expand...

If they have a national broadcaster, technically it's a Scottish asset too so Scotland are entitled to it however I cannot for the life of me are why an iScottish government would want to ditch it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29153022

Anything factual incorrect in this report from the BBC
		
Click to expand...

Not that I can see - however quoting from there

"When we are talking about two separate countries it is most probable that retailers will start pricing differently."

Not a lot of mention in that statement or anywhere in what the JL boss said of a 'hike' in prices - maybe he mentions an increase elsewhere.  You'll now tell me that a 'hike' could actually just be a small increase - but you and I both know that a 'hike' does not usually imply a small increase


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Strikes me as shoddy preparation as it's normal to have a balance in the audience for any such programme, but having failed to prepare properly by ensuring there is a balance, it's very poor form to ask people to lie for the sake of a TV programme when the subject matter is supposed to be factual and of such importance.
		
Click to expand...

Agreed


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not that I can see - however quoting from there

"When we are talking about two separate countries it is most probable that retailers will start pricing differently."

Not a lot of mention in that statement or anywhere in what the JL boss said of a 'hike' in prices - maybe he mentions an increase elsewhere.  You'll now tell me that a 'hike' could actually just be a small increase - but you and I both know that a 'hike' does not usually imply a small increase
		
Click to expand...

I haven't seen or heard the word hike so can't comment 

Can only comment on what I have heard and read 

Multiple outlets reports possibly price increases from companies like John Lewis


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			If they have a national broadcaster, technically it's a Scottish asset too so Scotland are entitled to it however I cannot for the life of me are why an iScottish government would want to ditch it.
		
Click to expand...

An Independant Scotland wouldn't ditch it 

They would have their own BBC Scotland including their own news channel and possibly own current affairs program as they do now and purchase the other programmes like Strictly etc


----------



## Val (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			An Independant Scotland wouldn't ditch it 

They would have their own BBC Scotland including their own news channel and possibly own current affairs program as they do now and purchase the other programmes like Strictly etc
		
Click to expand...

I agree, so DFT I'll ask another question that you won't answer. Why will an iScotland ditch the BBC?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I haven't seen or heard the word hike so can't comment 

Can only comment on what I have heard and read 

Multiple outlets reports possibly price increases from companies like John Lewis
		
Click to expand...

On JL boss statement BBC News was, for hours today, using the word 'hike' in one of the strapline headlines they rotate at the bottom of screen.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I agree, so DFT I'll ask another question that you won't answer. Why will an iScotland ditch the BBC?
		
Click to expand...

It will still receive the BBC but it will set up it's own national broadcasting service - likely utilising the BBC Scotland facilities located throughout the country.  Maybe just rename BBC Scotland - Scottish Broadcasting


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			On JL boss statement BBC News was, for hours today, using the word 'hike' in one of the strapline headlines they rotate at the bottom of screen.
		
Click to expand...

It will all come down once again to interpretation - hike means a sharp increase 

Any increase in price could easily be classed as sharp 

But it's such a small insignificance in the big picture to be worried about what words the media day.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It will still receive the BBC but it will set up it's own national broadcasting service - likely utilising the BBC Scotland facilities located throughout the country.  Maybe just rename BBC Scotland - Scottish Broadcasting
		
Click to expand...

So basically BBC Scotland and paid for by the Scottish taxpayers

Will the cost be higher or lower ? Especially when you consider that the pool is a lot smaller to get money from


----------



## Val (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So basically BBC Scotland and paid for by the Scottish taxpayers

Will the cost be higher or lower ? Especially when you consider that the pool is a lot smaller to get money from
		
Click to expand...

Yes it will and the cost will be the same, I'd go as far to say nothing will change, however I'm still keen to find out why DFT reckons an iScotland will ditch it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It will all come down once again to interpretation - hike means a sharp increase 

Any increase in price could easily be classed as sharp 

But it's such a small insignificance in the big picture to be worried about what words the media day.
		
Click to expand...

Yes 'hike' does mean that - but nowhere did the JL boss suggest anything of the sort.  Yes it's minor in the great scheme of things - but the statements made by the JL boss are being cited by BT as indicative of significant issues being raised by big business for an iScotland.  And in the case of JL I just don't believe that is what was said at all 

(that's me being protective btw )


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes 'hike' does mean that - but nowhere did the JL boss suggest anything of the sort.  Yes it's minor in the great scheme of things - but the statements made by the JL boss are being cited by BT as indicative of significant issues being raised by big business for an iScotland.  And in the case of JL I just don't believe that is what was said at all 

(that's me being protective btw )
		
Click to expand...

Isn't any price increases a significant issue though - regardless of it being sharp or not ? 

If businesses are warning of possible price increases that could happen due to a Yes vote isn't that something to be worried about


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Isn't any price increases a significant issue though - regardless of it being sharp or not ? 

If businesses are warning of possible price increases that could happen due to a Yes vote isn't that something to be worried about
		
Click to expand...

Yes!  But it isn't a HIKE - the word has connotations beyond a small increase in price that may happen over a period of time.  And in the great scheme of things cost and price variations of anything will vary and you might not notice the increase in any case - just absorbed into  other price fluctuations.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Is there anything LP does not know?

Is there.....?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes!  But it isn't a HIKE - the word has connotations beyond a small increase in price that may happen over a period of time.
		
Click to expand...

As I said - that's all down to interpretations of one single word which in the overall picture is insignificant 

Any increases regardless of size or period of time is something to consider because people will need to find money to pay for that increase

Really shouldn't get yourself in knots about the use of one word which has been used to create a headline


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			As I said - that's all down to interpretations of one single word which in the overall picture is insignificant 

Any increases regardless of size or period of time is something to consider because people will need to find money to pay for that increase

Really shouldn't get yourself in knots about the use of one word which has been used to create a headline
		
Click to expand...

It's not the headline as such, it's the misconstruing of a statement made by the boss of JL as part of structuring an argument that is the problem.  Believe lot's of small lies about someone and you will lose trust in that person.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It's not the headline as such, it's the misconstruing of a statement made by the boss of JL as part of structuring an argument that is the problem.  Believe lot's of small lies about someone and you will lose trust in that person.
		
Click to expand...

Welcome to the world of the media 

I have no doubt at all that a pro media outlet has been guilty of the same thing 

And 99% of the population would delve in a bit deeper to get passed the initial story if it effected them 

It takes two secs to have a quick look at the statement and to see exactly why the word hike was used to emphasis the statement made

I would hope anyone voting either way would be able to make their own judgement regardless of what the BBC or indeed any media outlet report.


----------



## the_coach (Sep 11, 2014)

as a total outsider looking in, a yes result would appear to be a  beginning of many pretty big problems for both Scotland & the UK  that would significantly weaken both parties place in the world, on the  business, defence, & as different 'nations' on health, pension,  tax, banking & financial fronts. would appear Salmond & the  'yessirs' have totally underestimated the cost of a fully independent  country.

Scotland (yessir leaders, supporters) appear to think  they will still be able to use the Â£ that this would still be supported  & underwritten by the BOE & the UK, the UK government appears  from over here to have a completely different viewpoint on that.
has Salmond factored in the cost of producing & administrating a 'new' currency. 
or  does an independent Scotland intend to continue to use the pound,  unsupported by the BOE & the UK government, in a similar way that  Panama does with our $.

seems there would be far to many parts to  this that are fairly unsolvable over a time span of 18 months or years for that matter, from  what I've seen & heard, if I were Scots I be extremely nervous  having a 'leader of the yes vote' that doesn't at this point appear to  have many of the answers at his fingertips already.
just a viewpoint from overseas.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Strikes me as shoddy preparation as it's normal to have a balance in the audience for any such programme, but having failed to prepare properly by ensuring there is a balance, it's very poor form to ask people to lie for the sake of a TV programme when the subject matter is supposed to be factual and of such importance.
		
Click to expand...

There are representatives from over 250 Scottish schools in the audience.
Obvious just a random selection

If the audience is overwhelmingly Yes then the BBC does not have a programme.
I doubt it though as the 16/17 year olds seem to favour No.

Brave researcher who tells a 16/17 year old what to say.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			There are representatives from over 250 Scottish schools in the audience.
Obvious just a random selection

If the audience is overwhelmingly Yes then the BBC does not have a programme.
I doubt it though as the 16/17 year olds seem to favour No.

Brave researcher who tells a 16/17 year old what to say.
		
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, the researcher who approached the girl I know to explain she would have to pretend to be a No or an Undecided was told where to get off.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 11, 2014)

I struggle to believe there are really 10% still undecided as the polls suggest. I reckon, from my educated point of view (  ) that they are NO voters who don't want to admit it yet for fear of stigma!


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I struggle to believe there are really 10% still undecided as the polls suggest. I reckon, from my educated point of view (  ) that they are NO voters who don't want to admit it yet for fear of stigma!
		
Click to expand...

It's an incredibly small sample size, but in my household there are still 2 undecided voters.  And the reason you state is not the reason they remain undecided.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			It's an incredibly small sample size, but in my household there are still 2 undecided voters.  And the reason you state is not the reason they remain undecided.
		
Click to expand...


Interesting. i genuinely didn't think many would be left undecided! Do you mind me asking how come they are still undecided?


----------



## fundy (Sep 11, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Interesting. i genuinely didn't think many would be left undecided! Do you mind me asking how come they are still undecided?
		
Click to expand...

Id guess on the basis that a lot of the key questions they want answered havent been (and wont be) just a whole load of supposition and bluster from both sides guessing as to what may or may not happen if either Yes or No wins


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Welcome to the world of the media 

I have no doubt at all that a pro media outlet has been guilty of the same thing 

And 99% of the population would delve in a bit deeper to get passed the initial story if it effected them 

It takes two secs to have a quick look at the statement and to see exactly why the word hike was used to emphasis the statement made

I would hope anyone voting either way would be able to make their own judgement regardless of what the BBC or indeed any media outlet report.
		
Click to expand...

This is my issue with the BBC coverage!

I'm resigned to the fact that most newspapers will take a particular stance and publish articles that support that view - I can always read more than one of them. 

But for the supposedly unbiased BBC to effectively campaign for the No side is wrong imo. And there are enough examples of that happening for it to more than just coincidence.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Interesting. i genuinely didn't think many would be left undecided! Do you mind me asking how come they are still undecided?
		
Click to expand...

I can only answer for myself as I am one of the 2.

I have never expected to be given answers to the questions many people rant and rave about e.g. the currency question, as the honest answer is no-one really knows the answers as each and every union or separation of countries is unique and therefore what the eventual settlement between the 2 parties will end up being no-one knows.  Similarly, no-one really knows the potential consequences of such a separation, be they good or bad.

So essentially, I see the decision I face as simply an idea i.e. do I prefer the idea of being independent or not, whatever that will eventually entail.  Or to put it another way, do I think becoming independent will be better for me, my family and my fellow Scots or do I think we would be better off sticking with what we know and remain within the UK.

As it's a golf forum, it's a bit like being asked to pick between keeping my existing set of irons or changing to a new set, but I'm not allowed to see them, hit them or know anything about the new set in advance.  And the Yes and No campaigns are the equivalent of 2 Pros, one telling me the new set will mean I will never again hit an iron fat, thin, left or right, only straight at the pin and never outside 4 feet, and the other Pro telling me if I switch irons my arms will fall off, every golf course within a 100 mile radius will instantly close down forever and I'll have to take up Scrabble.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 11, 2014)

I was a definite no vote at the start but I'm not so sure now,  even with the currency issues and some big business doubts
.As for defence who attacked us last anyway .


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I struggle to believe there are really 10% still undecided as the polls suggest. I reckon, from my educated point of view (  ) that they are NO voters who don't want to admit it yet for fear of stigma!
		
Click to expand...

Two plumbers in my house yesterday....both undecided. One from No to undecided.
That is 50% of the people in my house yesterday


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			As it's a golf forum, it's a bit like being asked to pick between keeping my existing set of irons or changing to a new set, but I'm not allowed to see them, hit them or know anything about the new set in advance.  And the Yes and No campaigns are the equivalent of 2 Pros, one telling me the new set will mean I will never again hit an iron fat, thin, left or right, only straight at the pin and never outside 4 feet, and the other Pro telling me if I switch irons my arms will fall off, every golf course within a 100 mile radius will instantly close down forever and I'll have to take up Scrabble.
		
Click to expand...

I like this analogy!

:thup:


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

On today's meeting at No.10 between David Cameron and supermarket bosses:

"According to the BBC, Number 10 are saying that David Cameronâ€™s meeting with supermarket bosses today and that Scotland was not mentioned."

Of course it wasn't


----------



## Imurg (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			As it's a golf forum, it's a bit like being asked to pick between keeping my existing set of irons or changing to a new set, but I'm not allowed to see them, hit them or know anything about the new set in advance.  And the Yes and No campaigns are the equivalent of 2 Pros, one telling me the new set will mean I will never again hit an iron fat, thin, left or right, only straight at the pin and never outside 4 feet, and the other Pro telling me if I switch irons my arms will fall off, every golf course within a 100 mile radius will instantly close down forever and I'll have to take up Scrabble.
		
Click to expand...

Nicely put...

So how the hell are you supposed to make a rational, probably irreversible, decision if that's the info you've got....?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I can only answer for myself as I am one of the 2.

I have never expected to be given answers to the questions many people rant and rave about e.g. the currency question, as the honest answer is no-one really knows the answers as each and every union or separation of countries is unique and therefore what the eventual settlement between the 2 parties will end up being no-one knows.  Similarly, no-one really knows the potential consequences of such a separation, be they good or bad.

So essentially, I see the decision I face as simply an idea i.e. do I prefer the idea of being independent or not, whatever that will eventually entail.  Or to put it another way, do I think becoming independent will be better for me, my family and my fellow Scots or do I think we would be better off sticking with what we know and remain within the UK.

As it's a golf forum, it's a bit like being asked to pick between keeping my existing set of irons or changing to a new set, but I'm not allowed to see them, hit them or know anything about the new set in advance.  And the Yes and No campaigns are the equivalent of 2 Pros, one telling me the new set will mean I will never again hit an iron fat, thin, left or right, only straight at the pin and never outside 4 feet, and the other Pro telling me if I switch irons my arms will fall off, every golf course within a 100 mile radius will instantly close down forever and I'll have to take up Scrabble.
		
Click to expand...

In line with most of the advice you get on here



go to a different pro


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

Imurg said:



			Nicely put...

So how the hell are you supposed to make a rational, probably irreversible, decision if that's the info you've got....?
		
Click to expand...

In my opinion, a reasoned and rational decision is not possible in favour of either Yes or No. Vote Yes and we've no idea what we'll get, or vote No and we still don't know what we'll get with all the new powers stuff, West Lothian question to be resolved etc. So it's a no idea what we're going to end up with no matter what.

No doubt that's why I have seriously considered the idea of not voting at all as I detest how both campaigns have been conducted and it sticks in my craw having to vote in favour of one of them. But I know I will vote one way or the other, just no idea which way yet.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			In line with most of the advice you get on here



go to a different pro 

Click to expand...

What I'm actually doing is trying to figure out what's best for myself as in this case, there are no pros you can trust, none at all.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			In my opinion, a reasoned and rational decision is not possible in favour of either Yes or No. Vote Yes and we've no idea what we'll get, or vote No and we still don't know what we'll get with all the new powers stuff, West Lothian question to be resolved etc. So it's a no idea what we're going to end up with no matter what.

No doubt that's why I have seriously considered the idea of not voting at all as I detest how both campaigns have been conducted and it sticks in my craw having to vote in favour of one of them. But I know I will vote one way or the other, just no idea which way yet.
		
Click to expand...

What is the West Lothian question if a no vote ?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

[video=youtube;rHmLb-RIbrM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHmLb-RIbrM[/video]


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What is the West Lothian question if a no vote ?
		
Click to expand...

More powers for Scotland following a No would inevitably lead to the WL question being discussed and perhaps finally resolved. I know I would be deeply unhappy if I was having decisions foisted upon me by politicians who have other more favourable arrangements for their own constituents that are decided elsewhere.

Only my opinion of course.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			More powers for Scotland following a No would inevitably lead to the WL question being discussed and perhaps finally resolved. I know I would be deeply unhappy if I was having decisions foisted upon me by politicians who have other more favourable arrangements for their own constituents that are decided elsewhere.

Only my opinion of course.
		
Click to expand...

What is the West Lothian question though mate ?


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What is the West Lothian question though mate ?
		
Click to expand...

Scottish MP's voting on matters that only affect England and Wales e.g. tuition fees being a recent example


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

Hydro debate went well, quite balanced. 
Grand to see 8,500 teenagers so engaged in the referendum.

George Galloway, wearing tight jeans and a hat [trendy!] representing Labour [?] sharing a pitch with a terribly embarrassed Ruth Davidson was amusing.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Scottish MP's voting on matters that only affect England and Wales e.g. tuition fees being a recent example
		
Click to expand...

Ah right - cheers for that.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Hydro debate went well, quite balanced. 
Grand to see 8,500 teenagers so engaged in the referendum.

George Galloway, wearing tight jeans and a hat [trendy!] representing Labour [?] sharing a pitch with a terribly embarrassed Ruth Davidson was amusing.
		
Click to expand...

Two horrible individuals.

Good boost again for YES having them pair on.

Galloway............"We'd all be speaking German if it wasn't for the Union".  The kind of rubbish my old Uncle comes out with on his way hame fae the pub...

Wholly embarrassing.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Two horrible individuals.

Good boost again for YES having them pair on.

Galloway............"We'd all be speaking German if it wasn't for the Union".  The kind of rubbish my old Uncle comes out with on his way hame fae the pub...

Wholly embarrassing.
		
Click to expand...

Approximately 20% of Battle of Britain RAF pilots were foreign, the largest foreign contingents coming from Poland, New Zealand, Canada and Czechoslovakia.  I'm sure a few of the Poles and Czechs could speak German


----------



## Andy808 (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Hydro debate went well, quite balanced. 
Grand to see 8,500 teenagers so engaged in the referendum.

George Galloway, wearing tight jeans and a hat [trendy!] representing Labour [?] sharing a pitch with a terribly embarrassed Ruth Davidson was amusing.
		
Click to expand...

Still smacks of desperation to even think they needed 16-18 year olds to vote!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

Andy808 said:



			Still smacks of desperation to even think they needed 16-18 year olds to vote!
		
Click to expand...

From whom?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 11, 2014)

Appears BBC were right to switch away from Salmonds speech 
Seems it wasn't very thrilling


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Approximately 20% of Battle of Britain RAF pilots were foreign, the largest foreign contingents coming from Poland, New Zealand, Canada and Czechoslovakia.  I'm sure a few of the Poles and Czechs could speak German 

Click to expand...

Galloway even finished off with a Nazi slur.

Utter tit of a human being.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Galloway even finished off with a Nazi slur.

Utter tit of a human being.
		
Click to expand...

I think he received the best boooos of the night for that.
Gives you a bit of hope for the future that 16/17 year old's can see right through such a creature.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think he received the best boooos of the night for that.
Gives you a bit of hope for the future that 16/17 year old's can see right through such a creature.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, yet the BBC can't eh?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Galloway even finished off with a Nazi slur.

Utter tit of a human being.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not actually sure he did, or I've yet to see any evidence, only twitter rumours.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not actually sure he did, or I've yet to see any evidence, only twitter rumours.
		
Click to expand...

I have seen it was edited out?

Either way he is a .....


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 11, 2014)

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...rge-galloway-slot-on-question-time.1410378979

Bet the BBC wished they had now.


----------



## Sweep (Sep 11, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Approximately 20% of Battle of Britain RAF pilots were foreign, the largest foreign contingents coming from Poland, New Zealand, Canada and Czechoslovakia.  I'm sure a few of the Poles and Czechs could speak German 

Click to expand...

Oh God. now we didn't win the war.


----------



## Sweep (Sep 11, 2014)

Speaking from a completely neutral standpoint, I have to say I am staggered this entire debate has got this far. Firstly, to have a referendum where the voters are asked to decide without knowing the exact details of each outcome is ridiculous beyond belief and both sides are to blame for this. Secondly, I cannot believe the Scottish people are even considering voting Yes, when they have no idea even what currency (if any) they will be able to use. I have to say I absolutely agree that Scotland should not use the pound. If the past 6 years have taught us anything about economics is that currency union does not and cannot work without political union. If Scotland votes yes the political union is over. 
I thought this referendum was about Scotland being an independent country. If that is the case, why would it want to use someone else's currency? it's Scotland's currency if it stays in the Union, if it leaves it's someone else's. 
The yes campaign says a no nuclear Scotland, because they know the UK will protect them with their weapons in the case of attack. These and a whole host of other things make this cherry picking NOT independence. It's nothing more then saying to your mum you are going to be independent because you are renting the flat down the road, but you still want her to do your washing and ironing and you will be round for your tea every night.
If Scotland votes yes, it's more about Scots getting misty eyed over a lone piper on the ramparts than anything to do with common sense and whilst it won't effect me one iota, I hope for their sake the Scots come to their senses before next Thursday and say no to this back of a fag packet load of tosh.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 11, 2014)

Sweep said:



			Oh God. now we didn't win the war.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure how you got to that from what I posted but knock yourself out if it makes you happy.


----------



## Val (Sep 12, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			I was a definite no vote at the start but I'm not so sure now,  even with the currency issues and some big business doubts
.As for defence who attacked us last anyway .

Click to expand...

Terrorists in 2007


----------



## Val (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...rge-galloway-slot-on-question-time.1410378979

Bet the BBC wished they had now.
		
Click to expand...

Is this the same bbc that would be ditched?


----------



## chrisd (Sep 12, 2014)

Sweep said:



			Speaking from a completely neutral standpoint, I have to say I am staggered this entire debate has got this far. Firstly, to have a referendum where the voters are asked to decide without knowing the exact details of each outcome is ridiculous beyond belief and both sides are to blame for this. Secondly, I cannot believe the Scottish people are even considering voting Yes, when they have no idea even what currency (if any) they will be able to use. I have to say I absolutely agree that Scotland should not use the pound. If the past 6 years have taught us anything about economics is that currency union does not and cannot work without political union. If Scotland votes yes the political union is over. 
I thought this referendum was about Scotland being an independent country. If that is the case, why would it want to use someone else's currency? it's Scotland's currency if it stays in the Union, if it leaves it's someone else's. 
The yes campaign says a no nuclear Scotland, because they know the UK will protect them with their weapons in the case of attack. These and a whole host of other things make this cherry picking NOT independence. It's nothing more then saying to your mum you are going to be independent because you are renting the flat down the road, but you still want her to do your washing and ironing and you will be round for your tea every night.
If Scotland votes yes, it's more about Scots getting misty eyed over a lone piper on the ramparts than anything to do with common sense and whilst it won't effect me one iota, I hope for their sake the Scots come to their senses before next Thursday and say no to this back of a fag packet load of tosh.
		
Click to expand...

How "independent" is a country without its own currency, if interest rates are set in London (and they would be) the Scots would be unable to dictate their own future economically, so, anything that dozy mare From the SNP said last night is pure guess work. Also, if your economy is based on the income from a depleting oil supply I think the YES campaign should talk about their plans to replace that income as the supply diminishes. They never answered George Galloway's point that the SNP oil revenue figures were calculated on $113 per barrel and he said that they've only reached that 4 times in his life - if the price stayed at under $100 doesn't that blow something of a gaping hole in their predicted income over the short! let alone long! term? 

I totally agree Sweep


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Is this the same bbc that would be ditched?
		
Click to expand...

Missed the point........Why would the BBC pick a maverick/lose cannon/idiot such as Galloway to take part in such an important debate. Why was a high profile lab/lib dem candidate not involved?


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Missed the point........Why would the BBC pick a maverick/lose cannon/idiot such as Galloway to take part in such an important debate. Why was a high profile lab/lib dem candidate not involved?
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps because he's an elected MP and the BBC likes to show up the public by showing them what total idiots we elect.  The country deserves the polititions they get, we, the people, elect them.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 12, 2014)

Poor old BBC, they get blamed for the politicat bias - from all sides


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/11/alex-salmond-treasury-bbc-rbs-scottish-independence

This one is rather more serious though....being swept under the carpet by our neutral Civil Servants though...just not cricket old boys.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

Nigel and The Kippers gig today in Glasgow and the Orangemen walking aboot Edinburgh at the weekend.
The Yes guys must think Christmas has come early.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/11/alex-salmond-treasury-bbc-rbs-scottish-independence

This one is rather more serious though....being swept under the carpet by our neutral Civil Servants though...just not cricket old boys.
		
Click to expand...

Lets be honest. Anything that remotely harms the YES campaign is deemed scandalous, unacceptable and scaremongering.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Perhaps because he's an elected MP and the BBC likes to show up the public by showing them what total idiots we elect.  The country deserves the polititions they get, we, the people, elect them.
		
Click to expand...

Elected English MP living in England without a vote.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Poor old BBC, they get blamed for the politicat bias - from all sides 

Click to expand...

Perhaps you could post some links showing BBC bias towards the YES campaign to back up your claim.


----------



## chrisd (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Elected English MP living in England without a vote.
		
Click to expand...

So not allowed to speak for the NO campaign?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/11/alex-salmond-treasury-bbc-rbs-scottish-independence

This one is rather more serious though....being swept under the carpet by our neutral Civil Servants though...just not cricket old boys.
		
Click to expand...

ONce again DfT, and I don't want you to think I'm just noting it's you, it is coincidence, but this is yet another attack by YES, over _how_ something is said, not _what _is said.

I may have missed it, but has AS replied even briefly to what was in the RBS announcement, or has he focused on how it was reported?


----------



## One Planer (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			ONce again DfT, and I don't want you to think I'm just noting it's you, it is coincidence, but this is yet another attack by YES, over _how_ something is said, not _what _is said.

*I may have missed it, but has AS replied even briefly to what was in the RBS announcement, or has he focused on how it was reported?*

Click to expand...

Very good point IMO.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

chrisd said:



			So not allowed to speak for the NO campaign?
		
Click to expand...

Where did I say that ?


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 12, 2014)

quite a fair bit of miss information going on the news.

Last night Ch4 ran a story about the highlands and said "in Inverness the majority of the population was on benefits"

Unemployment here is lower than the national Average.... we do have a lot of pensioners though.. maybe that's what they meant??


----------



## DCB (Sep 12, 2014)

Heard from a staunch Lib Dem activist about some of the goings on in town at the moment. He's been involved in elections many times as a supporter of his party. He's done the advertising/poster work for many years. He said there was always an unwritten rule that you didn't remove or deface another parties signage during an election campaign. This time it is different. He's trying to help the No campaign and anything they have been putting up is either removed, altered to remove the NO or replaced entirely by Yes signage. Seems that we've entered a new era in politics where anything goes.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			ONce again DfT, and I don't want you to think I'm just noting it's you, it is coincidence, but this is yet another attack by YES, over _how_ something is said, not _what _is said.

I may have missed it, but has AS replied even briefly to what was in the RBS announcement, or has he focused on how it was reported?
		
Click to expand...

He gave Nick Robinson a lengthy reply and pointed out the errors in some of his previous comments.
LLoyds headquarters etc.

The big issue as he said was the leaking of sensitive financial information from the British Treasury to a BBC source.
Please don't tell me that you think that was right and proper.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 12, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			quite a fair bit of miss information going on the news.

Last night Ch4 ran a story about the highlands and said "in Inverness the majority of the population was on benefits"

Unemployment here is lower than the national Average.... we do have a lot of pensioners though.. maybe that's what they meant??
		
Click to expand...

According to the last UK census, one in five of Scotland's population claims to have a disability or long term health condition.

In a population of a shade over 5 million that works out to, about, one million people.

Granted, not all of them are in Inverness, but that is a significant proportion of the Scottish populous claiming benefit of some kind.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What is the West Lothian question if a no vote ?
		
Click to expand...

Did you really not know about the West Lothian question given you have taken such an interest in the debate. The WL has been around for decades (courtesy of Tam Dalyell) and has been one of the basic debated conundrums when Home Rule has been discussed.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			He gave Nick Robinson a lengthy reply and pointed out the errors in some of his previous comments.
LLoyds headquarters etc.

The big issue as he said was the leaking of sensitive financial information from the British Treasury to a BBC source.
Please don't tell me that you think that was right and proper.
		
Click to expand...

Haven't seen that reply, so thank you for that. Still not sure that he is answering the questions, or just simply pointing our errors but as I haven't seen it I won't comment.

Yes, I can see how that is a big issue, but in the grand scheme of things, it's fairly insignificant. It's not right and proper, but it's disconcerting how much they focus on the _how_ and not the _what_. If he backed himself, he would be making much more of how he will resolve the issues that are raised, not throwing his toys out of the pram about journalists being biased or such like. He comes across as a paranoid man, and that doesn't do his campaign any good.


----------



## chrisd (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Where did I say that ?
		
Click to expand...

So he is allowed to?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 12, 2014)

Re: Galloway. Jim Murphy was pencilled in to go along with Ruth Davidson last night, but Better Together swapped him for Dode.Incredible that they took that chance, which has backfired as much as possible.He was getting laughed/jeered/booed by a majority of the crowd, and he lost the rag.Why would BT do that? Murphy would have been much,much better received.

There have been suggestions by folk there that Galloway, after his WWII rant compared The SNP to Thew Nazi party but The BBC editied it out.I think Galloway is too smart to play that card, but it's gaining momentum...lets see what happens today.

Oh, I know what's happening today, Nigel is back in town.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Haven't seen that reply, so thank you for that. Still not sure that he is answering the questions, or just simply pointing our errors but as I haven't seen it I won't comment.
		
Click to expand...

Why answer a question based up a false or inaccurate premis? - first seek to correct the false premis.   A new question based upon an accurate premis can then be asked and an answer sought,


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Re: Galloway. Jim Murphy was pencilled in to go along with Ruth Davidson last night, but Better Together swapped him for *Dode*.
		
Click to expand...

Ah I suspect you'll have lost most folks there (hopefully I get it )

Clue to confused - think big gangly borders Scottish rugby player


----------



## CMAC (Sep 12, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Lets be honest. Anything that remotely harms the YES campaign is deemed scandalous, unacceptable and scaremongering.
		
Click to expand...

exactly!

the main protagonists on here are acting exactly like the YES Campaign, attacking the delivery and presentation over the subject matter- deflection rather than decisions.

doon frae troon is one of the worst and your posts are childlike in their attacks. You are embarrassing yourself.

The YES campaign WILL lose, mark my words. A few tiny polls and a some loud mouthed ignoramuses will not win over common sense and decency.

The lies and fantasies regurgitated last night by that vile Sturgeon woman and her ridiculous Green sidekick were an insult to intelligent people. Galloway and Davidson spoke about facts and YES didnt like it (just like a few on here last night) so they attack by inference. Cheap and nasty.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 12, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Why answer a question based up a false or inaccurate premis? - first seek to correct the false premis.   A new question based upon an accurate premis can then be asked and an answer sought,
		
Click to expand...

Why not do both?

How hard would it to answer along the lines of 

"What you actually mean is XXXX, as that is what the situation actually is. In response to that, the YES vote proposes YYYYYYY"


----------



## CMAC (Sep 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Re: Galloway. Jim Murphy was pencilled in to go along with Ruth Davidson last night, but Better Together swapped him for Dode.Incredible that they took that chance, which has backfired as much as possible.*He was getting laughed/jeered/booed by a majority of the crowd,* and he lost the rag.Why would BT do that? Murphy would have been much,much better received.

There have been suggestions by folk there that Galloway, after his WWII rant compared The SNP to Thew Nazi party but The BBC editied it out.I think Galloway is too smart to play that card, but it's gaining momentum...lets see what happens today.

Oh, I know what's happening today, Nigel is back in town.
		
Click to expand...

I must have watched a different programme- recorded it so watched that again and its crystal clear the boos were from the YES voters at the front left (looking out), but I suppose thats a typical YES reaction, see one thing and twist it into something bigger. Why let the truth get in the way eh!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Did you really not know about the West Lothian question given you have taken such an interest in the debate. The WL has been around for decades (courtesy of Tam Dalyell) and has been one of the basic debated conundrums when Home Rule has been discussed.
		
Click to expand...

I also found it incredulous that someone who has debated long and hard on this thread was unaware of such a basic game changer as Tam's West Lothian question.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Haven't seen that reply, so thank you for that. Still not sure that he is answering the questions, or just simply pointing our errors but as I haven't seen it I won't comment.

Yes, I can see how that is a big issue, but in the grand scheme of things, it's fairly insignificant. It's not right and proper, but it's disconcerting how much they focus on the _how_ and not the _what_. If he backed himself, he would be making much more of how he will resolve the issues that are raised, not throwing his toys out of the pram about journalists being biased or such like. He comes across as a paranoid man, and that doesn't do his campaign any good.
		
Click to expand...

Here's an article and opinion - that pretty much reflects mine on the matter. Unusual source for me too!

http://www.theguardian.com/business...independence-banks-shift-lloyds-rbs-slow-leak

But I think AS's strategy of 'sticking to the policy of 'The White Paper' is a better one than replying to every detailed challenge - he'd be snowed under with minutae if he did that and he hasn't actually got the answers anyway as most of them are 'to be negotiated'!

And 'not answering the question' is one of the most essential skills of a politician anyway!


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 12, 2014)

Gareth said:



			According to the last UK census, one in five of Scotland's population claims to have a disability or long term health condition.

In a population of a shade over 5 million that works out to, about, one million people.

Granted, not all of them are in Inverness, but that is a significant proportion of the Scottish populous claiming benefit of some kind.
		
Click to expand...

its not the majority though is it, even county wide...????

As for Inverness you are more or less saying that the CH4 claim is correct?  the population of Inverness is 60,000 more or less so we have over 40K of  the population on benefits is laughable.

maybe they are counting children (child benefit ) and Pensioners ???


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 12, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			its not the majority though is it, even county wide...????

As for Inverness you are more or less saying that the CH4 claim is correct?  the population of Inverness is 60,000 more or less so we have over 40K of  the population on benefits is laughable.

maybe they are counting children (child benefit ) and Pensioners ???
		
Click to expand...

Pensioners are on benefits! If you had a town full only with pensioners, it would require a lot of payments?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I also found it incredulous that someone who has debated long and hard on this thread was unaware of such a basic game changer as Tam's West Lothian question.
		
Click to expand...


As bad as you suggesting that the Scottish border be moved down to incorporate the North of England

Or the fact that you and the yes continue to attack the way facts are delivered as opposed to actually tackling the facts

Or attacking the actual people who speak and dismiss what they say based on who they are and once again ignore what is actually being said


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 12, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Terrorists in 2007
		
Click to expand...

Correct, and the porters handled it  with a little help from the police.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 12, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Here's an article and opinion - that pretty much reflects mine on the matter. Unusual source for me too!

http://www.theguardian.com/business...independence-banks-shift-lloyds-rbs-slow-leak

But I think AS's strategy of 'sticking to the policy of 'The White Paper' is a better one than replying to every detailed challenge - he'd be snowed under with minutae if he did that and he hasn't actually got the answers anyway as most of them are 'to be negotiated'!

And 'not answering the question' is one of the most essential skills of a politician anyway! 

Click to expand...

Has he actually answered any detailed challenge ? 

Hasn't he been challenged on currency - no answer , defence - no answer , NHS - no answer , banks - no answer , big businesses - no answer 

Sorry that's incorrect he has had an answer - scaremongering is the generic answer


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I also found it *incredulous* that someone who has debated long and hard on this thread was unaware of such a basic game changer as Tam's West Lothian question.
		
Click to expand...

I think you really meant 'incredible'! But 'incredulous' could well describe at least 1 of the folk involved! 

And don't forget that it wasn't a question about West Lothian - as it often seems to be portrayed. But it was a question raised by 'the Member for West Lothian' - Tam Dalyell during a debate. It's just as relevant to Northern Ireland or Wales too. But Scottish independence would 'solve' much of it - as the Scottish MPs would disappear!


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Pensioners are on benefits! If you had a town full only with pensioners, it would require a lot of payments?
		
Click to expand...

but it isn't, pure and simple.

i wonder how some of the posh retirement towns on the south coast of England would react to being labelled a town on benefits?


----------



## DCB (Sep 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Has he actually answered any detailed challenge ? 

Hasn't he been challenged on currency - no answer , defence - no answer , NHS - no answer , banks - no answer , big businesses - no answer 

Sorry that's incorrect he has had an answer - scaremongering is the generic answer
		
Click to expand...


That's a fairly good summary of recent events


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 12, 2014)

So who thinks there will be a massive bombshell next week by Westminter/Bank of England etc just before the vote?
I feel a trump card is being hidden down the sleeve.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Has he actually answered any detailed challenge ? 

Hasn't he been challenged on currency - no answer , defence - no answer , NHS - no answer , banks - no answer , big businesses - no answer 

Sorry that's incorrect he has had an answer - scaremongering is the generic answer
		
Click to expand...

If you are saying that his answers are along the lines of 'You are simply scaremongering! We know it can work and We will make it do so - with emphasis on the 'We'' then there are certainly instances where both you and he are correct!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Why not do both?

How hard would it to answer along the lines of 

"What you actually mean is XXXX, as that is what the situation actually is. In response to that, the YES vote proposes YYYYYYY"
		
Click to expand...

OK fair in some cases - but if for instance the question is about AS view on loss of jobs due to Bank X moving out of Edinburgh; then what question is there to answer if AS points out that Bank X is not predicting ANY loss of jobs (no matter what you might want to read into the actual words in Bank X statement) "If Bank X changes it's mind and there might be loss of jobs..." ? Nah.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 12, 2014)

Beezerk said:



			So who thinks there will be a massive bombshell next week by Westminter/Bank of England etc just before the vote?
I feel a trump card is being hidden down the sleeve.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure they have anything left?

EU:discussed
NATO: discussed
Â£:discussed
banks:discussed
pensions: discussed
nhs:discussed

What, that's significant, is left?


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 12, 2014)

anyway on a lighter note, what night do you think The film "Brave heart" will be on TV


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

One interesting thing about this referendum (I like numbers so this is bound to interest me) is in the voting.  Though the YES trail NO by 4% and this is indeed a 4% lead - it's only a 2% swing to be neck-and-neck in a two horse race.  Even a 10% gap - which in a normal election would be huge - is only a 5% swing for level pegging.  I suspect very few voters will spoil their ballot paper; there is no 'protest' against the main candidates; no 3rd Party halfway house.  Each and vote is effectively 2 votes - the 6 pointer of football.


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not sure they have anything left?

EU:discussed
NATO: discussed
Â£:discussed
banks:discussed
pensions: discussed
nhs:discussed

What, that's significant, is left?
		
Click to expand...

Dunno, just can't imagine they don't have an ace to play next week if the polls are still close. RBS pulling out of Scotland, supermarkets saying prices in Scotland will rise, there has to be more.
Oh and "discussed" doesn't mean the subjects have been put to bed.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			anyway on a lighter note, what night do you think The film "Brave heart" will be on TV

Click to expand...

It's cobblers - whaur's the bluddy brig for a start


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 12, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			anyway on a lighter note, what night do you think The film "Brave heart" will be on TV

Click to expand...

LOL
You can have our skirts, but you can never take our Buckfast


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Perhaps you could post some links showing BBC bias towards the YES campaign to back up your claim.
		
Click to expand...

Why bother, you'll suggest its a plant or some sinister plot. Time to take off your tin foil hat and watch the 2200 hr BBC news with your little fat man who always manages to expand on the Yes campaigns message.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm not sure they have anything left?

EU:discussed
NATO: discussed
Â£:discussed
banks:discussed
pensions: discussed
nhs:discussed

What, that's significant, is left?
		
Click to expand...

It's the national lottery, we'll not be able to play it any more. All my hopes of early retirement dashed! :rant:


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 12, 2014)

Beezerk said:



			LOL
You can have our skirts, but you can never take our Buckfast 

Click to expand...

As it's made initially just down the road from me I suggest we stop sending it north for the next 7 days.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 12, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			anyway on a lighter note, what night do you think The film "Brave heart" will be on TV

Click to expand...

Not sure it would go down to well with some on here as they are always after factual evidence rather than a light hearted comedy of how Holywood thinks it should have happened.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 12, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			One interesting thing about this referendum (I like numbers so this is bound to interest me) is in the voting.  Though the YES trail NO by 4% and this is indeed a 4% lead - it's only a 2% swing to be neck-and-neck in a two horse race.  Even a 10% gap - which in a normal election would be huge - is only a 5% swing for level pegging.  I suspect very few voters will spoil their ballot paper; there is no 'protest' against the main candidates; no 3rd Party halfway house.  Each and vote is effectively 2 votes - the 6 pointer of football.
		
Click to expand...

as you like figures what about this.

only *one* poll had YES ahead.

it polled *1012* people.

you had to be registered with yougov to be in the poll (ok thats not a number but worth noting it's not representative)

The reality I think (hope) will be very different and nearer 61/39 for a no.


The only time I'll be shouting YES is on September 19th when the NO's win.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 12, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			As it's made initially just down the road from me I suggest we stop sending it north for the next 7 days.
		
Click to expand...

Who knows how the vote would go if lanarkshire sobered up.....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I think you really meant 'incredible'! But 'incredulous' could well describe at least 1 of the folk involved! 

And don't forget that it wasn't a question about West Lothian - as it often seems to be portrayed. But it was a question raised by 'the Member for West Lothian' - Tam Dalyell during a debate. It's just as relevant to Northern Ireland or Wales too. But Scottish independence would 'solve' much of it - as the Scottish MPs would disappear!
		
Click to expand...

And if the powers (whatever they me be) that will be delivered to Holyrood following a NO are anything like what is being suggested then being a Westminster MP for a Scottish constituency is going to be a very PT job.  And maybe along with the new powers will come a significant reduction in Scottish constituency representation at Westminster - who knows?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 12, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Not sure it would go down to well with some on here as they are always after factual evidence rather than a light hearted comedy of how Holywood thinks it should have happened.
		
Click to expand...

if you have been to the Wallace monument in Stirling, the statue they have of William Wallace has Mel Gibsons face- you couldn't make it up!

I don't think there's any truth in the rumour the SNP did it to attract more tourists and give them what they expected to see.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 12, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And if the powers (whatever they me be) that will be delivered to Holyrood following a NO are anything like what is being suggested then being a Westminster MP for a Scottish constituency is going to be a very PT job.  And maybe along with the new powers will come a significant reduction in Scottish constituency representation at Westminster - who knows?
		
Click to expand...

I think all UK constituencies should elect an MP who sits in a local parliament 3 days a week (or whatever) to deal with devolved matters and the rest of the time at a UK parliament for UK-wide matters. Since devolution all we've had is even more politicians and all the cost and environmental impact (hot air) they generate.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 12, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Clue to confused - think big gangly borders Scottish rugby player
		
Click to expand...

There you go us in RUK never knew you played any other sport apart from curling in Scotland.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 12, 2014)

Here's an interesting point of view on BBC "bias"

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/yes-of-course-the-bbc-is-biased-against-you/


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			There you go us in RUK never knew you played any other sport apart from curling in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Ah - you spotted we did competitive hairdressing 

Love the bowls on ice game


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 12, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I think all UK constituencies should elect an MP who sits in a local parliament 3 days a week (or whatever) to deal with devolved matters and the rest of the time at a UK parliament for UK-wide matters. Since devolution all we've had is even more politicians and all the cost and environmental impact (hot air) they generate.
		
Click to expand...

The problem with this will be one of cost, give an MP and a public sector worker something new and they will want new staff, new buildings and new equipment. Look at what that massive carbuncle in Edinburgh cost the UK tax payer. Mind you in the event of a Yes vote, selling it of as luxury apartments might get us a few bob back.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 12, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Here's an interesting point of view on BBC "bias"

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/yes-of-course-the-bbc-is-biased-against-you/

Click to expand...

Good item.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 12, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Look at what that massive carbuncle in Edinburgh cost the UK tax payer. Mind you in the event of a Yes vote, selling it of as luxury apartments might get us a few bob back.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure, the neighbours are a bit dodgy.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

CMAC said:



			as you like figures what about this.

only *one* poll had YES ahead.

it polled *1012* people.

you had to be registered with yougov to be in the poll (ok thats not a number but worth noting it's not representative)

The reality I think (hope) will be very different and nearer 61/39 for a no.


The only time I'll be shouting YES is on September 19th when the NO's win.
		
Click to expand...

I'm thinking that it could be a fairly wide NO just because every vote counts twice towards the margin.  Lots of voters going to be standing in the booth with pencil in hand, pausing and taking a deep breath.  I think at that point more will go NO because of uncertainly than will go YES through 'I won't in my lifetime have this opportunity again'

My heart still hopes I am wrong.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 12, 2014)

I've been thinking.

I assume an iScot would revert back to speaking gaelic? They would surely want independence from the Language as well?


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I've been thinking.

I assume an iScot would revert back to speaking gaelic? They would surely want independence from the Language as well?
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately they cannot claim Gaelic as just there own language, I have enough problems with the one they speak now.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 12, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			anyway on a lighter note, what night do you think The film "Brave heart" will be on TV

Click to expand...

It'll be on straight after Trainspotting.


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I've been thinking.

I assume an iScot would revert back to speaking gaelic? They would surely want independence from the Language as well?
		
Click to expand...

what do you mean revert back to speaking Gaelic, its only the Highlands and islands that spoke Gaelic in Scotland.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I've been thinking.

I assume an iScot would revert back to speaking gaelic? They would surely want independence from the Language as well?
		
Click to expand...

Cha'n 'eil

(my father was a native Gaelic speaker - I know lot's of wee swearies and 'telling off' phrases - and NO isn't one btw mods)

nb it's Gaalic not Gaylic


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 12, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			what do you mean revert back to speaking Gaelic, its only the Highlands and islands that spoke Gaelic in Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Oo, what did the rest of Scotland speak?

Genuine question!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'm thinking that it could be a fairly wide NO just because every vote counts twice towards the margin.  Lots of voters going to be standing in the booth with pencil in hand, pausing and taking a deep breath.  I think at that point more will go NO because of uncertainly than will go YES through 'I won't in my lifetime have this opportunity again'

My heart still hopes I am wrong.
		
Click to expand...

It is going to be a close call, polls bear no significance.
I always thought the same as you about poll booth change Hogan up to a couple of weeks agoI would include myself in that category. Now think in many cases the opposite will happen, just a hunch, could be totally wrong.
Quite a few folk seem to be switching straight from NO to YES and I think the undecideds are miles higher than many polls say.

My loud/in your face NO neighbour believes I am voting NO
The NO telephone call my English wife fended last night was met with a polite southern English lassie saying 'of course I shall be voting for you' when she is in fact a keen Independence voter.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 12, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Here's an interesting point of view on BBC "bias"

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/yes-of-course-the-bbc-is-biased-against-you/

Click to expand...

That's a pretty reasonable assessment!

I believe they occasionally exceed their 'brief' though - and the support of the SNP, quite apart from the question of Independence, indicates that the Scots have a desire for greater autonomy that the present situation is not giving them.

While in that link, I did notice another, rather scary, article...Tony Blair GQ Philanthropist of the Year!


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The NO telephone call my English wife fended last night was met with a polite southern English lassie saying 'of course I shall be voting for you' when she is in fact a keen Independence voter.
		
Click to expand...

You think, first man I've met who can read a woman's mind.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Oo, what did the rest of Scotland speak?

Genuine question!
		
Click to expand...

Which part of the country and when?

They reckon that William Wallace (from Elderslie - a village outside Paisley - which is a town just outside Glasgow) spoke Welsh.

Much later on sassenachs would have spoken braid scots (read some Burns for that)

North East Scotland (Buchan and around) speak Doric (read some Lewis Grassic Gibbon for that)


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 12, 2014)

So glad to see it's the NO vote that is the loud one!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			So glad to see it's the NO vote that is the loud one!
		
Click to expand...

This is the area of Edinburgh Jim Sillars got egged and verbally abused a few days back, old Jimbo took it in good spirits.I'm not sure I fancy this guys chances to be honest, he'll either be egged or laughed at ( from both yes and no)


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is the area of Edinburgh Jim Sillars got egged and verbally abused a few days back, old Jimbo took it in good spirits.I'm not sure I fancy this guys chances to be honest, he'll either be egged or laughed at ( from both yes and no)
		
Click to expand...

I quite like his style though... even if I disagree with his voting intention.

:thup:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 12, 2014)

Mobile Phone bills.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is the area of Edinburgh Jim Sillars got egged and verbally abused a few days back, old Jimbo took it in good spirits.I'm not sure I fancy this guys chances to be honest, he'll either be egged or laughed at ( from both yes and no)
		
Click to expand...

Pies perhaps - nicked from (historic) Sainsbury's of course!

Not an area I use to fancy spending much time in without 'reinforcements'! Surely 90% Yes anyway? Or is apathy the issue?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 12, 2014)

Here is a thought for the voters.....

If we were currently an Independent Country and we were holding a Referendum to see if we were to join the Union......a place that'll put Nuclear Weapons into our own back garden and take all our taxes, would folks vote with a YES?


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 12, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Here is a thought for the voters.....

If we were currently an Independent Country and we were holding a Referendum to see if we were to join the Union......a place that'll put Nuclear Weapons into our own back garden and take all our taxes, would folks vote with a YES?
		
Click to expand...

Theres a list of just this sort doing the rounds, the currents Mrs148 has it on her face book page, but struggled to post it on here.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Sep 12, 2014)

As the Ryder Cup is due to be held in the UK this year and Europe (France) in 2018 how soon after a Yes vote can we expect the announcement that it is being moved to England/Wales/NI? If Scotland then join the EU they can bid to host it again in 2026 after it returns to the UK in 2022.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 12, 2014)

patricks148 said:



			Theres a list of just this sort doing the rounds, the currents Mrs148 has it on her face book page, but struggled to post it on here.
		
Click to expand...

And, of course, practically everything on it is a flawed, twisted version of reality.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			You think, first man I've met who can read a woman's mind. 

Click to expand...

I know, she spent two years convincing me to change my mind.


----------



## Val (Sep 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Missed the point........Why would the BBC pick a maverick/lose cannon/idiot such as Galloway to take part in such an important debate. Why was a high profile lab/lib dem candidate not involved?
		
Click to expand...

You missed my point, that's the third time I've asked the question, why can't you back up your claim?


----------



## Val (Sep 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Mobile Phone bills.
		
Click to expand...

What about them?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 12, 2014)

Valentino said:



			What about them?
		
Click to expand...

What do think I'm suggesting?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			What do think I'm suggesting?
		
Click to expand...

That your mobile phone bill has skyrocketed this month from increased forum action?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			What do think I'm suggesting?
		
Click to expand...

The sky high roaming charges we'll face in future when we visit Englandshire!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 12, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			That your mobile phone bill has skyrocketed this month from increased forum action?
		
Click to expand...

Ha! not far off the truth.Got the text of doom from O2 a week into my monthly allowance telling me I'm near my data limit.


But no, I'm suggesting that O2/EE/BT/Vodafone/TalkTalk have all been at #10 today and will probably tomorrow announce higher bills if Scotland votes YES


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 12, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			But no, I'm suggesting that O2/EE/BT/Vodafone/TalkTalk have all been at #10 today and will probably tomorrow announce higher bills if Scotland votes YES
		
Click to expand...

I'm with 3

:whoo:


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 12, 2014)

Bet 365 - referendum odds-- yes vote 3/1, no vote 1/4.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 12, 2014)

Clear anti-independence bias shown on BBC website picture....




:ears:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 12, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Here is a thought for the voters.....

If we were currently an Independent Country and we were holding a Referendum to see if we were to join the Union......a place that'll put Nuclear Weapons into our own back garden and take all our taxes, would folks vote with a YES?
		
Click to expand...


Surely that all depends on the state of the independent Country


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2014)

Guardian ICM poll out today is 42 No, 40 Yes, 17 No?Yes?

I'd say that's good for YES given the pelters being handed out by NO this week and was taken after the three new pals headed north.

Plus 87% definite to vote - brilliant - well done Scotland on that one,.


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 12, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Here is a thought for the voters.....

If we were currently an Independent Country and we were holding a Referendum to see if we were to join the Union......a place that'll put Nuclear Weapons into our own back garden and take all our taxes, would folks vote with a YES?
		
Click to expand...

lol - a coffee over the keyboard moment. And if said country was stony broke... oops, you've already been there.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 12, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			lol - a coffee over the keyboard moment. And if said country was stony broke... oops, you've already been there.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

And bringing the NO debate to the ultimate nit picking low by speaking of the messages [shopping]
Morrison's said that their prices may come down in an iScotland.

Just been to Tesco's and nearly everything is on offer or bogof.
I will concede that perhaps that has more to do with their failing business than independence.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 12, 2014)

Valentino said:



			You missed my point, that's the third time I've asked the question, why can't you back up your claim?
		
Click to expand...

Sorry Val but I have no idea of what I should be replying to, please remind me.


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 12, 2014)

Taken from another forum 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jivl9m58w3c1dr0/train.jpg?dl=0


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 13, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Here is a thought for the voters.....

If we were currently an Independent Country and we were holding a Referendum to see if we were to join the Union......a place that'll put Nuclear Weapons into our own back garden *and take all our taxes*, would folks vote with a YES?
		
Click to expand...

Take all our taxes and send more back.


----------



## Bobirdie (Sep 13, 2014)

Scotland have been getting the bum deal for years.
I dont know why folk are think we get more back than we give. Total nonsense.


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 13, 2014)

Bobirdie said:



			Scotland have been getting the bum deal for years.
I dont know why folk are think we get more back than we give. Total nonsense.
		
Click to expand...

More total nonsense. 

Get your self to any inner city in any part of the UK and you'll see they are all in the same boat. Courtesy of the Barnett formula there has been more spending per head in Scotland for donkey's year, and many of those years its been a Scottish Prime Minister AND Scottish Chancellor.

Too many chips on too many shoulders...


----------



## Bobirdie (Sep 13, 2014)

Scotland have 8.4% population of the Uk. They spend 9.3% of the Uk money. Thats thr info the no campaign are putting out there. 

What they are forgetting is that Scotland contributes 9.9% of the Uks money.

If we got the 9.9% share back that we put in we would have another Â£4.4bn to spend in our country.

These are all facts from the GERS report 2102-2013 . (Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland report)
Based on data from Scotland and Uk government sources published every year.


----------



## Bobirdie (Sep 13, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			More total nonsense. 

Get your self to any inner city in any part of the UK and you'll see they are all in the same boat. Courtesy of the Barnett formula there has been more spending per head in Scotland for donkey's year, and many of those years its been a Scottish Prime Minister AND Scottish Chancellor.

Too many chips on too many shoulders...
		
Click to expand...

You need to read your facts buddy. And not ones on no campaigns websites etc.
Yes scotland do recieve more per head. However they contribute more in taxes than the uk average. Statistics as follows.

Income per person scotland= Â£10'741  expenditure = Â£12'181
Income per person Uk          = Â£9'054     expenditure = Â£10'966

Spending per person on Scottish is Â£1215 higher than the Uk average.
Taxes raised per person in Scotland is Â£1687 higher per person than the Uk average.


----------



## Bobirdie (Sep 13, 2014)

Cant argue with facts


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 13, 2014)

Bobirdie said:



			You need to read your facts buddy. And not ones on no campaigns websites etc.
Yes scotland do recieve more per head. However they contribute more in taxes than the uk average. Statistics as follows.

Income per person scotland= Â£10'741  expenditure = Â£12'181
Income per person Uk          = Â£9'054     expenditure = Â£10'966

Spending per person on Scottish is Â£1215 higher than the Uk average.
Taxes raised per person in Scotland is Â£1687 higher per person than the Uk average.
		
Click to expand...

nowt wrong with my facts. At present Scotland are part of the UK, and the money the UK generates is spread around the UK, inc the Â£10billion generated in the Square Mile of London. When you're an independent country you'll get to spend it where you want.

Your increased tax generation per head would suggest you already have a higher average wage than the rest of the UK. But for what is purported to be a caring, social country you don't seem to want to share it around the UK, which you are a part of. 

Typical selfish response from many of the Yes campaigners.


----------



## Bobirdie (Sep 13, 2014)

Why are labour sennding 100 mps to glasgow to support the no campaign.offering the power we first asked for which lead to the referendum??? If we are that much of a drain to the uk why do people want us to stay???

And as for yes campaign. Not me.Im 60/40 at the moment studying all the facts to do with my country.

Im happy the way the country is at the moment. I would happily stay part of the uk.

What I dont agree with is Â£1.3 trillion in debt.
Â£37bn of cuts in public sector next year.
Â£100bn going towards the new nuclear trident program.

Come on the country is in mega debt. And they will run our nhs into the ground in favour of developing new nuclear warheads. Which will never be used.

Nuclear warfare is illegal. I cant understand why the country continues to plough money into it


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 13, 2014)

Bobirdie said:



			Why are labour sennding 100 mps to glasgow to support the no campaign.offering the power we first asked for which lead to the referendum??? If we are that much of a drain to the uk why do people want us to stay???

And as for yes campaign. Not me.Im 60/40 at the moment studying all the facts to do with my country.

Im happy the way the country is at the moment. I would happily stay part of the uk.

What I dont agree with is Â£1.3 trillion in debt.
Â£37bn of cuts in public sector next year.
Â£100bn going towards the new nuclear trident program.

Come on the country is in mega debt. And they will run our nhs into the ground in favour of developing new nuclear warheads. Which will never be used.

Nuclear warfare is illegal. I cant understand why the country continues to plough money into it
		
Click to expand...

I totally, 100% agree with everything you've posted above. Why does the UK want Scotland to stay? Truthfully, I'd say its because of the balance to the budget the oil tax revenue brings. Change the balance and the house of cards that Â£1.3trillion debt brings will see the rUK back into recession. 

And if there is a currency Union, Scotland will feel the effect of that. So Scotland has choices. Go totally independent and have the cost of setting up its own central bank - but where does the money come from for that? What truth is there in the Â£135mill funding deficit that would happen post Yes? Or Go independent with a CU, which would see Scotland suffer from interest rate rises in the rUK - not full control of there own budget. Or stay as part of the Union and contribute to getting the UK out of the mess its in.

But on the issue of oil; how wealthy was Scotland pre-70's oil boom? And where will it get its tax revenues from when the wells are dry? Was Scotland a nett contributor pre-70's? And where did the money spent in Scotland come from pre-70's?

My jaundiced view; Scotland wanted the Union in 1707 coz it was stony broke. Scotland has done very well out of the Union. But now it is in a strong position financially it wants out. Scotland came into the 'house' when it was hungry and has been well fed. Now it wants to leave, taking the silver on the way out.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 13, 2014)

According to the Daily Mail headlines [font of all knowledge]
A yes vote will trigger a global recession....aye right.

Pretty grovelling comments from the BBC on Newswatch for their handling of the Ashia King situation, TUC Conference key note speech [cut away for the announcement of a baby due to be born in 8 months time] and the Yes campaign International Press Conference. [Heckling of Scottish First Minister and cut away for a South African murder trial verdict]


----------



## CMAC (Sep 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			According to the Daily Mail headlines [font of all knowledge]
A yes vote will trigger a global recession....aye right.

Pretty grovelling comments from the BBC on Newswatch for their handling of the Ashia King situation, TUC Conference key note speech [cut away for the announcement of a baby due to be born in 8 months time] and the Yes campaign International Press Conference. [Heckling of Scottish First Minister and cut away for a South African murder trial verdict]
		
Click to expand...

More idiotic attacks on presentation over content


John Swinney comments yesterday sums up the YES attitude, what a great boost for the sensible NO campaign. Keep it up John:thup:


----------



## Bobirdie (Sep 13, 2014)

Again you have great points above which I do agree with mate. It was cameron that told us to run for independence if we wanted more powers, and now its 50/50 ish he offers us the powers we first wanted. What has changed???


I have had a great life as part of the Uk and if it stayed as it is now for the next 100 years I would be happy 100% no vote. I feel Scotland deserve more of a say in their own country.


----------



## DCB (Sep 13, 2014)

Anyone see Jim Sillars on Sky News early this morning. He was being interviewed after his comments yesterday about a "day of reconning" and that BP would be brought into line by nationalising them. The man wants to stop eating the blue smarties. It was an embarrassment.  He had a perfect opportunity to clarify what he said and what he meant and he blew it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 13, 2014)

DCB said:



			Anyone see Jim Sillars on Sky News early this morning. He was being interviewed after his comments yesterday about a "day of reconning" and that BP would be brought into line by nationalising them. The man wants to stop eating the blue smarties. It was an embarrassment.  He had a perfect opportunity to clarify what he said and what he meant and he blew it.
		
Click to expand...

Silly comment.
Although I think he said ' they will find out what nationalism is' slightly different but still a silly threat.
Silly comment from BP as well, with all of their Scottish interests the should have said nothing.
Didn't see the Sky interview.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

#bbcbias  :whoo:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 13, 2014)

I also heard that MacDonalds will increase the price of a big Mac by 5p if Scotland votes yes.
[Not sure if that one is true.]


----------



## ColchesterFC (Sep 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I also heard that MacDonalds will increase the price of a big Mac by 5p if Scotland votes yes.
[Not sure if that one is true.]
		
Click to expand...

And it would appear they're going to change their name from McDonald's to MacDonald' s to appear more Scottish.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 13, 2014)

ColchesterFC said:



			And it would appear they're going to change their name from McDonald's to MacDonald' s to appear more Scottish. 

Click to expand...

Does that mean I should have called it a Big Mc


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)




----------



## Hobbit (Sep 13, 2014)

Dodger said:










Click to expand...

On the one hand, hilarious... but perhaps even more so, a bit perverted


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			On the one hand, hilarious... but perhaps even more so, a bit perverted
		
Click to expand...


Whatever floats your boat.:mmm:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 13, 2014)

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/09/salmonds-nhs-claims-have-been-shredded-ifs


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/09/salmonds-nhs-claims-have-been-shredded-ifs

Click to expand...

Unfortunately those that need to read it never will and won't even know about it. Just proves that Salmond is a better liar that's all.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

A thing of beauty.

We sadly don't see enough of Jim. A great man.

[video=youtube;4WWtRmSJFLs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WWtRmSJFLs[/video]


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

#JUSTSAYYES


[video=youtube;d82bptEtfzM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d82bptEtfzM[/video]


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

Daily Mail....utter scum.

http://t.co/qVkfuhcZ58

http://t.co/a2mQnlpXc9


----------



## DCB (Sep 13, 2014)

Sorry Dodger but Sillars is a dinasaur who seems to conveniently forget little details like how his party played their part in inflicting Maggie on us. As for the belief that Europe will accept us with open arms because we're currently a member (as part of the UK) we're going to be in a sorry state when it turns out not to be the case.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 13, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Daily Mail....utter scum.

http://t.co/qVkfuhcZ58

http://t.co/a2mQnlpXc9

Click to expand...

What's the problem to evoke such a disgusting word ?

Surely that should be aimed at the two Scottish rugby players making the suggestions ?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

DCB said:



			Sorry Dodger but Sillars is a dinasaur who seems to conveniently forget little details like how his party played their part in inflicting Maggie on us. As for the belief that Europe will accept us with open arms because we're currently a member (as part of the UK) we're going to be in a sorry state when it turns out not to be the case.
		
Click to expand...


And is that the case Dave??


----------



## delc (Sep 13, 2014)

I'll guess we will need Hadrian's Wall to stop the Scots from escaping when the Scottish Labour Party and SNP Government set their personal tax rates to pay for all the goodies they are promising, without any subsidy from Westminster!


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

Great scenes from Buchanan Street today.   #VOTEYES


----------



## DCB (Sep 13, 2014)

I don't believe the EU will let Scotland enter via a side door. It'll have to be on their terms. It'll take several years to jump thru all the necessary hoops and that will do us no good whatsoever.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 13, 2014)

DCB said:



			I don't believe the EU will let Scotland enter via a side door. It'll have to be on their terms. It'll take several years to jump thru all the necessary hoops and that will do us no good whatsoever.
		
Click to expand...

And have the â‚¬ which is a condition of entry these days.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 13, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Daily Mail....utter scum.

http://t.co/qVkfuhcZ58

http://t.co/a2mQnlpXc9

Click to expand...

You are obviously a reader or you wouldn't have found it.


----------



## DCB (Sep 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			And have the â‚¬ which is a condition of entry these days.
		
Click to expand...

Amongst other things .....


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

DCB said:



			I don't believe the EU will let Scotland enter via a side door. It'll have to be on their terms. It'll take several years to jump thru all the necessary hoops and that will do us no good whatsoever.
		
Click to expand...


I disagree.

Lets wait and see,come Friday it may not even be an issue and I'm not going to fall out with you over a difference of opinion.You are a good man.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			You are obviously a reader or you wouldn't have found it.
		
Click to expand...


No. sorry to disappoint but it was found on a Scottish Fitbaw forum.

Always happy to help thanks.


----------



## DCB (Sep 13, 2014)

Fair enough, we'll agree to disagree. This is going to be a long week, but whatever the outcome, we've got to get on with it come the end of the week.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 13, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Great scenes from Buchanan Street today.   #VOTEYES






Click to expand...

Was that the Ukip Rally?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 13, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I disagree.

Lets wait and see,come Friday it may not even be an issue and I'm not going to fall out with you over a difference of opinion.You are a good man.
		
Click to expand...

Haven't people in the right positions said it will be a struggle for Scotland to join the EU ?

People who have been involved in deciding membership to the EU 

People far more qualified than anyone on here have suggested Scotland will not find it easy to join the EU 

But guess it's the usual yes vote answer - disagree or scaremongering or we don't need plan B because plan A will work 

It's always the case of refusing to see the issues right in front them


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

DCB said:



			Fair enough, we'll agree to disagree. This is going to be a long week, but whatever the outcome, we've got to get on with it come the end of the week.
		
Click to expand...

We have a vote and what will be will be but there's no need for some of the hatred that is going about.

My favourite phrase in  life is "life is too short".

Whatever happens you and i will still share a beer or two anytime.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 13, 2014)

Glad to see the Edinburgh Orange Order march went off peacefully.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 13, 2014)

Dodger said:



			No. sorry to disappoint but it was found on a Scottish Fitbaw forum.

Always happy to help thanks.
		
Click to expand...

You found the Daily Wail on Scottish fitness site - strange on both counts.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 13, 2014)

Seriously, does anyone know how yesterdays Glasgow UKip rally went ?
No sign of any reports anywhere.
How many turned up ? 
Was it Peaceful ?


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 13, 2014)

I think Farage had some racist posters stuffed up his nose (not literally) but nothing of any significance seems to have kicked off.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			You found the Daily Wail on Scottish fitness site - strange on both counts.
		
Click to expand...

No, not a fitness site but just you carry in with your total misunderstanding of life up north.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 13, 2014)

http://www.robertburns.org/works/344.shtml

Auld words from the forming of the Union from someone who would probably vote yes


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 13, 2014)

Dodger said:



			No, not a fitness site but just you carry in with your total misunderstanding of life up north.
		
Click to expand...

:lol:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.robertburns.org/works/344.shtml

Auld words from the forming of the Union from someone who would probably vote yes
		
Click to expand...

Is he being dug up to allow him to vote ?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 13, 2014)

[video=youtube;yr-XawubMPQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yr-XawubMPQ[/video]


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 13, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Daily Mail....utter scum.

http://t.co/qVkfuhcZ58

http://t.co/a2mQnlpXc9

Click to expand...


Thought the first article was a report on what two ex-Scottish rugby players feel about independence. Surely, as Scots, they are allowed to be vocal "no's."

But I do think elements of the second article sail very close to the wind. But I would agree I wouldn't trust the guy. Extremely skilled politician but yuk!


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 13, 2014)

Dodger said:



			No, not a fitness site but just you carry in with your total misunderstanding of life up north.
		
Click to expand...

Now what makes you think I am misunderstanding life up north.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 13, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Now what makes you think I am misunderstanding life up north.
		
Click to expand...

Somebody tell him please:lol:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 13, 2014)

Last night of The Proms......do you think they will end it with a Scottish medley for a change, Am Gonna Be instead of Jeruselam.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 13, 2014)




----------



## CMAC (Sep 13, 2014)

Some really idiotic comments on here by a few, I don't believe you realise it's not a political vote and you are voting yes for all the wrong reasons! Facts are being ignored and characters attacked. I really can't understand why you choose to be so myopic in your view and childlike (just one really) in your postings. 

If you win you will have dealt a very damaging blow to the whole country and killed Scotland in the process.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 13, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Thought the first article was a report on what two ex-Scottish rugby players feel about independence. Surely, as Scots, they are allowed to be vocal "no's."

But I do think elements of the second article sail very close to the wind. But I would agree I wouldn't trust the guy. Extremely skilled politician but yuk!
		
Click to expand...

I don't agree with much that dodger posts but that first article was truly offensive. I intensely dislike salmond and sturgeon but whether they have kids or not is completely irrelevant.


----------



## Captainron (Sep 14, 2014)

All this referendum is making clear is the division amongst the people of Scotland. At least when Norway went for it they were 99% united.

It saddens me and I am worried about recriminations against the 'losing' side.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

I was under the impression that Norway had been an independent country for years.


----------



## DCB (Sep 14, 2014)

CMAC said:



			Some really idiotic comments on here by a few, I don't believe you realise it's not a political vote and you are voting yes for all the wrong reasons! Facts are being ignored and characters attacked. I really can't understand why you choose to be so myopic in your view and childlike (just one really) in your postings. 

If you win you will have dealt a very damaging blow to the whole country and killed Scotland in the process.
		
Click to expand...

The whole thing has already made some rather sad changes to what we were. I'm concerned with what will happen if it is a very very close vote and some of those who chose the wrong way don't take kindly to the outcome. I also see issues, should it go with a Yes outcome, where there will be people who feel things aren't going as fast or as well as they were promised.

Important week ahead, probably the most important for a long time.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 14, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I don't agree with much that dodger posts but that first article was truly offensive. I intensely dislike salmond and sturgeon but whether they have kids or not is completely irrelevant.
		
Click to expand...

Both articles demonstrate the 'propoganda' nature of the DM that is what I detest about it. It's not a Newspaper for me so much as uses the medium to distribute its views. The 'Wentworth Sold' article demonstrating how an article can be full of errors and irrelevancies while getting they use the item to indoctrinate the reader with their political view!


----------



## fundy (Sep 14, 2014)

Not sure if its been posted before but Kevin Bridges more lighthearted view worth watching

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2BKrh43rhI


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

[video]http://new.livestream.com/IndependenceLive/BBCBiasV[/video]


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			[video]http://new.livestream.com/IndependenceLive/BBCBiasV[/video]
		
Click to expand...


So the yes people still continue to worry about the important things then like the BBC instead of tackling the issue that really matter

I guess it's masks the holes


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

I would have thought that BBC [State Broadcasting] political bias was a fairly important issue for the British public.
You would need to be blind, deaf or totally stupid not to notice it in this referendum.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

26 minutes in Tommy takes old weetabix heed to the cleaners.

I always think Tommy is going to nut someone....:lol:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04gmjl7/sunday-politics-14092014


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I would have thought that BBC [State Broadcasting] political bias was a fairly important issue for the British public.
You would need to be blind, deaf or totally stupid not to notice it in this referendum.
		
Click to expand...

Don't see it as important at all - certainly no where near enough to be the news some are making it out to be 

It's being used to mask the issues the yes campaign can't seem to tackle head on.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/yes-of-course-the-bbc-is-biased-against-you/


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			26 minutes in Tommy takes old weetabix heed to the cleaners.

I always think Tommy is going to nut someone....:lol:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04gmjl7/sunday-politics-14092014

Click to expand...

He does frighten folk did you notice Neil edging further and further away from him!!..........the only banks you will see closing in an Independent Scotland will be food banks. Great line.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			He does frighten folk did you notice Neil edging further and further away from him!!..........the only banks you will see closing in an Independent Scotland will be food banks. Great line.
		
Click to expand...

A dodgier man you'll not find but I love his passion.

Would not like a scrap with him!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Don't see it as important at all - certainly no where near enough to be the news some are making it out to be 

It's being used to mask the issues the yes campaign can't seem to tackle head on.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/yes-of-course-the-bbc-is-biased-against-you/

Click to expand...

I am sure you are aware that it goes way beyond that.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I am sure you are aware that it goes way beyond that.
		
Click to expand...

You are in the closing stages of a massively important vote and you are too busy worrying about an "apparent" bias ( more paranoia than anything ) as opposed to tackling the real issues of the independance vote - it gives the yes campaign an excuse to avoid having to tackles those real issues - currency , EU membership , defence , budgets , NATO membership , NHS , taxes - all issues with that have so many questions but don't get answered by the yes campaign.

The importance appears to be attacking the people delivering messages as opposed to tackling the content of the message being delivered 

It as if the whole yes campaign is walking around sticking it's fingers in it's ears and ignoring those real issues.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

I think you will find that, like the West Lothian question, these things you mention have been debated to a standstill.

With a very close vote expected, after the debating, does it not concern you that the national broadcasting service is misreporting against one of the two sides.

Instead of dancing around  the question I am asking a simple yes or no will do


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think you will find that, like the West Lothian question, these things you mention have been debated to a standstill.

With a very close vote expected, after the debating, does it not concern you that the national broadcasting service is misreporting against one of the two sides.

Instead of dancing around  the question I am asking a simple yes or no will do
		
Click to expand...


Debated ?! Actually they have been ignored with the answer normally - scaremongering or we don't need a plan b 

And in answer does your question - no it doesn't concern me and it being made such a big deal is the Yes can loan being desperate to find something to grab a hold of to try and deflect the gaping holes in the yes campaign policies.

A question you have been asked countless times is - why are you and the yes campaign more concerned in how the the message is delivered as opposed to the message itself ? 

The BBC isn't bias - it hasn't delivered incorrect facts - it's all paranoia and something the yes campaign have grabbed to are currently hanging onto 

No doubt if a no vote happens they now have someone to blame 

Did you read the blog which dismisses the bias claim ?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Is there not going to be a "leave the EU" referendum in the next couple of years or is that not happening now?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Debated ?! Actually they have been ignored with the answer normally - scaremongering or we don't need a plan b 

And in answer does your question - no it doesn't concern me and it being made such a big deal is the Yes can loan being desperate to find something to grab a hold of to try and deflect the gaping holes in the yes campaign policies.

A question you have been asked countless times is - why are you and the yes campaign more concerned in how the the message is delivered as opposed to the message itself ? 

The BBC isn't bias - it hasn't delivered incorrect facts - it's all paranoia and something the yes campaign have grabbed to are currently hanging onto 

No doubt if a no vote happens they now have someone to blame 

Did you read the blog which dismisses the bias claim ?
		
Click to expand...

Only an idiot would claim there has been no bias.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...ely-dont-get-me-wrong-i-like-these-f.25322002


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Is there not going to be a "leave the EU" referendum in the next couple of years or is that not happening now?
		
Click to expand...

Proposed in 2017 I thought if the Conservatives wins the 2015 election 

No doubt UKIP would propose one - possibly labour might 

Crystal ball very cloudy right now


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

I think the Yes campaign have a fairly serious case for a void and a re run if they fail to win.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think the Yes campaign have a fairly serious case for a void and a re run if they fail to win.
		
Click to expand...


:rofl:

And that is your crowning glory of posts

I didn't think anything would ever beat the idea of moving the Scottish border south into North of England but that beats it hands down

Thankfully I reckon you are just on a wind up because no one could post something like that and be serious 

:rofl: :rofl:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Only an idiot would claim there has been no bias.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...ely-dont-get-me-wrong-i-like-these-f.25322002

Click to expand...


Can't read your article 


http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/yes-of-course-the-bbc-is-biased-against-you/


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Today there is a protest in Glasgow's BBC place,a protest against their bias.

BBC have reported 350 there.

From the pictures and social media reports they appear to have missed a zero off that report.

No,no of course there has not been any bias from them.

Interesting to see if the demonstration is actually featured on the BBC news.

As I said only an idiot would say that there has not been a bias from the BBC.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Today there is a protest in Glasgow's BBC place,a protest against their bias.

BBC have reported 350 there.

From the pictures and social media reports they appear to have missed a zero off that report.

No,no of course there has not been any bias from them.

Interesting to see if the demonstration is actually featured on the BBC news.

As I said only an idiot would say that there has not been a bias from the BBC.
		
Click to expand...


Nice to see they are all concentrating on the real important issues in regards the referendum 

Why would it feature on the news ? In the grand scheme if things it meaningless - 300 or 3000 - it's meaningless , if people focus on it then they must not be very sure of their policies which is what they should be focusing on. 

Its quite funny the focus on the BBC from the yes campaign - just shows a level of desperation.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Nice to see they are all concentrating on the real important issues in regards the referendum 

Why would it feature on the news ? In the grand scheme if things it meaningless - 300 or 3000 - it's meaningless , if people focus on it then they must not be very sure of their policies which is what they should be focusing on. 

Its quite funny the focus on the BBC from the yes campaign - just shows a level of desperation.
		
Click to expand...

It's worrying that you don't believe that the national broadcaster should be impartial and even more worrying that you can't see the issue in the fact that they most certainly are not.

They are huge players in this when in reality they should not be.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			It's worrying that you don't believe that the national broadcaster should be impartial and even more worrying that you can't see the issue in the fact that they most certainly are not.

They are huge players in this when in reality they should not be.
		
Click to expand...

If people in Scotland get influenced by what the BBC report ( when if they miss anything there are many other media outlets reporting things ) then that says a great deal about the yes campaign 

The Yes campaign should be focusing on persuading people to vote yes and highlighting how a yes vote could improve the country and provide solid grounding for those reasons and provide the answers to the hard questions 

Nope instead they will complain about the BBC , complain about the treasury - spending more time complaining than actually trying to persuade voters - it's a smokescreen to cover up the massive cracks in the policies of the Yes campaign.

Maybe instead of attacking the people that deliver the message have a look at the message being delivered.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			If people in Scotland get influenced by what the BBC report ( when if they miss anything there are many other media outlets reporting things ) then that says a great deal about the yes campaign 

The Yes campaign should be focusing on persuading people to vote yes and highlighting how a yes vote could improve the country and provide solid grounding for those reasons and provide the answers to the hard questions 

Nope instead they will complain about the BBC , complain about the treasury - spending more time complaining than actually trying to persuade voters - it's a smokescreen to cover up the massive cracks in the policies of the Yes campaign.

Maybe instead of attacking the people that deliver the message have a look at the message being delivered.
		
Click to expand...

So you admit that there is a bias then?

I am more than happy with the message that is being delivered from the right people. This next few days will be monumental and I'm glad to see the majority are seeing through the BBC and Westminster propaganda that is being delivered.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			So you admit that there is a bias then?

I am more than happy with the message that is being delivered from the right people. This next few days will be monumental and I'm glad to see the majority are seeing through the BBC and Westminster propaganda that is being delivered.
		
Click to expand...

I have no idea - doesn't seem that way but I know it is certainly not the most important thing people in Scotland right now should be worried about 

Yes you are happy with the message being delivered - if it's a positive message about the Yes campaign 

Perfect example in recent days 

RBS report they will be possibly moving from Scotland along with other banks and companies which could lead to job losses 

This is reported to the BBC and they report it -

Yes campaign response - scaremongering and attack on the BBC for being bias - ignore that actual message that big businesses and banks could well leave Scotland which would mean job losses - which  is the important part and instead attack the BBC for the way it's reported 

The yes campaign should be concentrating on responding to these statements and tryin to find ways to turn that negative into a positive - they should be trying to counter it 

Nope instead the result to "scaremongering" responses - protests against the BBC and just dismissing a statement or report that suggest Scotland voting yes could well be a bad thing that could hit the people of Scotland in the pocket badly.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I have no idea - doesn't seem that way but I know it is certainly not the most important thing people in Scotland right now should be worried about 

Yes you are happy with the message being delivered - if it's a positive message about the Yes campaign 

Perfect example in recent days 

RBS report they will be possibly moving from Scotland along with other banks and companies which could lead to job losses 

This is reported to the BBC and they report it -

Yes campaign response - scaremongering and attack on the BBC for being bias - ignore that actual message that big businesses and banks could well leave Scotland which would mean job losses - which  is the important part and instead attack the BBC for the way it's reported 

The yes campaign should be concentrating on responding to these statements and tryin to find ways to turn that negative into a positive - they should be trying to counter it 

Nope instead the result to "scaremongering" responses - protests against the BBC and just dismissing a statement or report that suggest Scotland voting yes could well be a bad thing that could hit the people of Scotland in the pocket badly.
		
Click to expand...


It is a contingency plan.Rightly so they have looked into this.

RBS will not move mark my words.

A lot of negatives are being focused on. 100 years of oil will ensure that many companies will be attracted to our country but nobody is reporting that.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			It is a contingency plan.Rightly so they have looked into this.

RBS will not move mark my words.

A lot of negatives are being focused on. 100 years of oil will ensure that many companies will be attracted to our country but nobody is reporting that.
		
Click to expand...


Yet experts says 40 years of oil not 100

And RBS have said they will move if a Yes

And your response is stereotypical Salmond - no they won't ?! 

Sorry but that ignoring it and just dismissing it 

The company themselves have told you they may well move if a yes vote happens - well what happens if what they are saying happens 

What happens if every negative that is being mentioned happens ? It's just being ignored - being swept under the carpet and being denied there is ever a chance of it happening 

And it's those type of responses that will scare people and mean a no vote is looking likely to win - because the Yes campaign don't have the answers to counter.

This picture sums it up


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

http://newsnetscotland.com/index.ph...end-anti-bias-protest-outside-bbc-scotland-hq

BBC says 350 newsnet say 2000 which one do you believe ?


OOPS wrong post


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://newsnetscotland.com/index.ph...end-anti-bias-protest-outside-bbc-scotland-hq

BBC says 350 newsnet say 2000 which one do you believe ?


OOPS wrong post

Click to expand...

This is the BBC report - can't see where is say 350 

But they do say the police say over a thousand 


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29196912


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Yet experts says 40 years of oil not 100

And RBS have said they will move if a Yes

And your response is stereotypical Salmond - no they won't ?! 

Sorry but that ignoring it and just dismissing it 

The company themselves have told you they may well move if a yes vote happens - well what happens if what they are saying happens 

What happens if every negative that is being mentioned happens ? It's just being ignored - being swept under the carpet and being denied there is ever a chance of it happening 

And it's those type of responses that will scare people and mean a no vote is looking likely to win - because the Yes campaign don't have the answers to counter.

This picture sums it up 

View attachment 12249

Click to expand...

100 years of WEST coast oil that is untapped.

Not surprised you have not heard about it though.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			100 years of WEST coast oil that is untapped.

Not surprised you have not heard about it though.
		
Click to expand...

Do you mean in the areas of the Hebrides in the very deep water and the geogically difficult to access and will cost over Â£1.5 billion to possible try and extract with no guarantees ??

A few other reports 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...1edfd9-d0ec-4bb2-826b-38c76bb113aa_story.html

http://www.energyvoice.com/2014/09/...nd-separatists-claim-uk-oil-40-year-campaign/


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Do you mean in the areas of the Hebrides in the very deep water and the geogically difficult to access and will cost over Â£1.5 billion to possible try and extract with no guarantees ??
		
Click to expand...

http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news...ntapped-oil-and-gas-reserves-worth-trillions/

Industry experts.

Not some bloke that support Liverpool and thinks he knows everything.

You could start a war in an empty room.

The cost is nothing.The companies would spend it to accumulate that amount of that there is no doubt.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news...ntapped-oil-and-gas-reserves-worth-trillions/

Industry experts.

Not some bloke that support Liverpool and thinks he knows everything.

You could start a war in an empty room.

The cost is nothing.The companies would spend it to accumulate that amount of that there is no doubt.
		
Click to expand...

*The investigation also found over the next 10 years upwards of one million barrels a day could be pumped from the Atlantic Margins if more than Â£1.5 billion is invested to extract it.*

Have you told these companies that they should invest the Â£1.5billion - seems a no brainer - wonder why they aren't doing it right now 

Wonder why there is a decline in oil production since 1999 in the UK

But it is interesting that when "experts" produce reports showing something negative they get dismissed so quickly

Wonder if this person supports Liverpool 

*Ian Wood, who built a global energy services company, says there could be between 15 billion and 16.5 billion barrels of oil and gas still to be recovered from Scottish waters. That's far short of the 24 billion barrels, worth Â£1.5 trillion, claimed by the Scottish government.
Wood told industry website energyvoice.com last month that declining production would start to hit Scottish jobs and the economy in 15 years.
BP (BP), which has been pumping oil from the North Sea for 50 years, said the industry would be best served by keeping the U.K. together.
"However, the province is now mature and I believe Sir Ian Wood correctly assesses its future potential," BP CEO Bob Dudley said.
Shell (RDSA) CEO Ben van Beurden said much of the North Sea's remaining reserves were likely to be in isolated or remote areas, making them unprofitable to develop without improved tax incentives.
"As existing infrastructure gets older and output falls, costs will go up and tax receipts will come down," van Beurden said. *


----------



## drdel (Sep 14, 2014)

If Scotland should become independent I wonder as a sovereign nation how taxing 6million people will be able to afford 
1. free health care for all
2. Unemployment benefits
3 Child benefits
4 Postage across their whole country at a standard rate
5 Air traffic control systems
6 Build a central Bank reserve
7 A defence capability, I know they are claiming Â£15bn of assets from the UK but whose is gone to pay training personnel and there will be about Â£5bn million per year to operate the kit. Whole will police their airspace against the Russian Bear aircraft I'm sure Mr Putin will enjoy playing games across the air corridors and sending his submarines into areas around where the oil is supposedly located.

All this and loads more is supposedly going to come from Oil taxes.

I worry that neither side has even dreamt of the real consequences but if the Yes vote wins the average Scot is surely going to be paying a very high price to learn


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

Sir Ian wood also said that there was enough Scottish oil to last a lifetime.

Since then all and sundry have been arguing as to the definition of a lifetime.

Mayfly or giant tortoise


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



*The investigation also found over the next 10 years upwards of one million barrels a day could be pumped from the Atlantic Margins if more than Â£1.5 billion is invested to extract it.*

Have you told these companies that they should invest the Â£1.5billion - seems a no brainer - wonder why they aren't doing it right now 

Wonder why there is a decline in oil production since 1999 in the UK

But it is interesting that when "experts" produce reports showing something negative they get dismissed so quickly

Wonder if this person supports Liverpool 

*Ian Wood, who built a global energy services company, says there could be between 15 billion and 16.5 billion barrels of oil and gas still to be recovered from Scottish waters. That's far short of the 24 billion barrels, worth Â£1.5 trillion, claimed by the Scottish government.
Wood told industry website energyvoice.com last month that declining production would start to hit Scottish jobs and the economy in 15 years.
BP (BP), which has been pumping oil from the North Sea for 50 years, said the industry would be best served by keeping the U.K. together.
"However, the province is now mature and I believe Sir Ian Wood correctly assesses its future potential," BP CEO Bob Dudley said.
Shell (RDSA) CEO Ben van Beurden said much of the North Sea's remaining reserves were likely to be in isolated or remote areas, making them unprofitable to develop without improved tax incentives.
"As existing infrastructure gets older and output falls, costs will go up and tax receipts will come down," van Beurden said. *

Click to expand...

One word - Trident.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			One word - Trident.
		
Click to expand...

So Trident is stopping production of the oil there despite your expect saying it was geogically difficult to drill there ?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/06/11/the-real-state-of-scotlands-oil-and-gas-reserves/


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/06/11/the-real-state-of-scotlands-oil-and-gas-reserves/

Click to expand...

The figure needed to spend keeps increasing 

*and note particularly his production estimate for the number of barrels per day (b/d), â€œProduction over the next ten years (from the Scottish Atlantic Margin) might range up to one million barrels per day, if companies are willing to invest $1520 billion to achieve such levelsâ€œ.*

With all this supposed oil I'm just amazed that production has done nothing but decline in the last 15 years - why when there is so much oil 

Why are there companies not rushing to spend the billions needed - especially when the guarantees are so concrete ( they are concrete aren't they ) 

Is it 6000 barrels of oil that is produced by a private Scottish firm out of the millions a day ? The rest all done by foreign companies. 

So how exactly are an Independant Scotland going to get the money from these reserves - that's it tax - going to ask then companies to invest billions into possible reserves then tax them for the pleasure

Can see Bp etc jumping at the chance right now - still begs the question why they aren't doing it right now


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The figure needed to spend keeps increasing 

*and note particularly his production estimate for the number of barrels per day (b/d), â€œProduction over the next ten years (from the Scottish Atlantic Margin) might range up to one million barrels per day, if companies are willing to invest $1520 billion to achieve such levelsâ€œ.*

With all this supposed oil I'm just amazed that production has done nothing but decline in the last 15 years - why when there is so much oil 

Why are there companies not rushing to spend the billions needed - especially when the guarantees are so concrete ( they are concrete aren't they ) 

Is it 6000 barrels of oil that is produced by a private Scottish firm out of the millions a day ? The rest all done by foreign companies. 

So how exactly are an Independant Scotland going to get the money from these reserves - that's it tax - going to ask then companies to invest billions into possible reserves then tax them for the pleasure

Can see Bp etc jumping at the chance right now - still begs the question why they aren't doing it right now
		
Click to expand...

The Westminster Government are not allowing it....


----------



## CMAC (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news...ntapped-oil-and-gas-reserves-worth-trillions/

Industry experts.

*Not some bloke that support Liverpool and thinks he knows everything.
*
*You could start a war in an empty room.
*
The cost is nothing.The companies would spend it to accumulate that amount of that there is no doubt.
		
Click to expand...

...and out comes the stereotypical YES campaigners response- attack the individual, ignore the facts and stick in a sweeping statement at the end saying it will be alright


Phil, you are putting a factual argument together and a good job, but you cant argue against blind faith and assumption.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

CMAC said:



			...and out comes the stereotypical YES campaigners response- attack the individual, ignore the facts and stick in a sweeping statement at the end saying it will be alright


Phil, you are putting a factual argument together and a good job, but you cant argue against blind faith and assumption.
		
Click to expand...

Which parts of the bit in bold are untrue?:smirk:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			The Westminster Government are not allowing it....
		
Click to expand...


In the Firth of Clyde where they are unsure about oil reserves 

But what about further west towards the Hebrides ? Are Westminster stopping companies investing the billions required ? 

What about in the North Sea where production has been on the decline - is that because of Westminster as well ? 

Again it's the blame game.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

Oil is so Yesterday.
Don't you know we are into Hydrogen now.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Oil is so Yesterday.
Don't you know we are into Hydrogen now.
		
Click to expand...


Scotland should move to hot air - you would power the whole country


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/2g6o1k/researchers_at_glasgow_university_have_claimed_a/

Don't need hot air when we have this.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/2g6o1k/researchers_at_glasgow_university_have_claimed_a/

Don't need hot air when we have this.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl: sums up the YES campaigns plans for the future- a Uni science project that in a lab shows 'favourable results'.

yup, I'll stake my mortgage on that then:rofl:


----------



## CMAC (Sep 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Scotland should move to hot air - you would power the whole country 

Click to expand...

:whoo:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

CMAC said:



			:whoo:
		
Click to expand...

Foolish man who mocks Scots inventorsoo::smirk::angry:

I can make silly wee figures as well/


----------



## CMAC (Sep 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Foolish man who mocks Scots inventorsoo::smirk::angry:

I can make silly wee figures as well/
		
Click to expand...

you're sounding like Swinney now:smirk:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

That is actually quite funny!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

One of the senior members of the NO vote claims they have made a pigs ear of it

http://www.sundaypost.com/news-view...ndum/labour-squandering-great-legacy-1.575646


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

[video=youtube;TSOu8f549iM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSOu8f549iM[/video]


----------



## DCB (Sep 14, 2014)

CMAC said:



			:rofl: sums up the YES campaigns plans for the future- a Uni science project that in a lab shows 'favourable results'.

yup, I'll stake my mortgage on that then:rofl:
		
Click to expand...

That's not necessarily as silly as it sounds. Some of the previous research projects from Glasgow Uni have gone on to become commercially viable products. I remember looking at two different items in the past that did indeed become earners for those who ' bought in ' to the idea. My boss at the time was amazed at the simplicity of one of the items and how they'd packaged it in a manner that was so simple, many would have discarded it at the first glance. If this capture technology does indeed work, someone will buy it without a second glance.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 14, 2014)

DCB said:



			That's not necessarily as silly as it sounds. Some of the previous research projects from Glasgow Uni have gone on to become commercially viable products. I remember looking at two different items in the past that did indeed become earners for those who ' bought in ' to the idea. My boss at the time was amazed at the simplicity of one of the items and how they'd packaged it in a manner that was so simple, many would have discarded it at the first glance. If this capture technology does indeed work, someone will buy it without a second glance.
		
Click to expand...

but ya wouldnt bankroll a whole country on it would ya!


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 14, 2014)

drdel said:



			If Scotland should become independent I wonder as a sovereign nation how taxing 6million people will be able to afford 
1. free health care for all
2. Unemployment benefits
3 Child benefits
4 Postage across their whole country at a standard rate
5 Air traffic control systems
6 Build a central Bank reserve
7 A defence capability, I know they are claiming Â£15bn of assets from the UK but whose is gone to pay training personnel and there will be about Â£5bn million per year to operate the kit. Whole will police their airspace against the Russian Bear aircraft I'm sure Mr Putin will enjoy playing games across the air corridors and sending his submarines into areas around where the oil is supposedly located.

All this and loads more is supposedly going to come from Oil taxes.

I worry that neither side has even dreamt of the real consequences but if the Yes vote wins the average Scot is surely going to be paying a very high price to learn
		
Click to expand...

The same way New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and other similarly sized countries do - and have done for decades!

And Defence doesn't seem to be a problem for those countries! Who's to say Russian subs aren't nosing about North Sea oil fields already - though for what purpose, I have no idea. Seems the Daily Mail propoganda has found a recipient!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

CMAC said:



			but ya wouldnt bankroll a whole country on it would ya!
		
Click to expand...

I think the company who replace petrol would make the odd bawbee.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 14, 2014)

Going off on a little tangent here. 

A question for the YES voters. 

Do you feel all the questions posed regarding your countries future have been answered adequately by the YES campaign?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 14, 2014)

Tonight on the BBC Referendum Debate, presenter James Cook revealed he was sent a Treasury briefing on RBS without requesting it - and before an announcement had been made by the bank itself.

The First Minister is now demanding full disclosure from the Treasury........


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Going off on a little tangent here. 

A question for the YES voters. 

Do you feel all the questions posed regarding your countries future have been answered adequately by the YES campaign?
		
Click to expand...

Of course not but less so than the No voters last minute panic measures.
We are voting for a pig in a poke whatever way we vote.
I have no doubt that a CU will be traded off against Trident, I think that deal has already been agreed. Why else would Salmond be so quiet on his ace card.

BBC just said that 6,000 protesters were outside their Scottish headquarters.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Tonight on the BBC Referendum Debate, presenter James Cook revealed he was sent a Treasury briefing on RBS without requesting it - and before an announcement had been made by the bank itself.

The First Minister is now demanding full disclosure from the Treasury........
		
Click to expand...

The First Minister can demand whatever he likes - currently he is trying to have his country leave the UK so no doubt the Treasury can tell exactly where to go.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 14, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Of course not but less so than the No voters last minute panic measures.
We are voting for a pig in a poke whatever way we vote.
I have no doubt that a CU will be traded off against Trident, I think that deal has already been agreed. Why else would Salmond be so quiet on his ace card.

*BBC just said that 6,000 protesters were outside their Scottish headquarters*.
		
Click to expand...

Surely not on the bias BBC - did you it claim they were saying it was 350 ?


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 14, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Tonight on the BBC Referendum Debate, presenter James Cook revealed he was sent a Treasury briefing on RBS without requesting it - and before an announcement had been made by the bank itself.

The First Minister is now demanding full disclosure from the Treasury........
		
Click to expand...

That could quite possibly be the case. But it would have had a dirty great big 'Embargoed until ......', or equivalent, notice stamped on it! So that would be yet another example of mis (or incomplete) information! It's a standard method of working with the media that allows info to be distributed fairly and simply.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 14, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Surely not on the bias BBC - did you it claim they were saying it was 350 ?
		
Click to expand...

They sent the Janny doon to do a recount.


----------



## the smiling assassin (Sep 14, 2014)

Watched tonight's debate, yes side took a real beating, sad to the celeb panellist clutching at so many straws, uncomfortable viewing.


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 14, 2014)

I wonder what Uncle Sam would think about Trident being kicked out of Scotland.   I would imagine it would initiate a veto on the Scots joining NATO and a number of trade sanctions to boot!


----------



## CMAC (Sep 14, 2014)

YES bully boy tactics? You decide!

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffee...-yes-side-mastered-the-art-of-mob-politics-2/


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 14, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			I wonder what Uncle Sam would think about Trident being kicked out of Scotland.   I would imagine it would initiate a veto on the Scots joining NATO and a number of trade sanctions to boot!
		
Click to expand...

Maybe Putin a offer to some other super power could happen.:smirk:


----------



## Captainron (Sep 14, 2014)

My missus was up in Scotland for the weekend. Says it felt like when she lived in Northern Ireland back in the day.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 15, 2014)

Did anyone else catch the Radio 4 program discussing the YES/NO vote, on Friday  night I think it was? tuned in halfway through so missed the names, but it really seemed like the arguments being put across by the YES representatives were shot down so easily. Form listening to that, it was hard to wonder how it's got so close, some of there suggestions were just laughable.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			That could quite possibly be the case. But it would have had a dirty great big 'Embargoed until ......', or equivalent, notice stamped on it! So that would be yet another example of mis (or incomplete) information! It's a standard method of working with the media that allows info to be distributed fairly and simply.
		
Click to expand...

Not the way the Treasury released it which was apparently highly illegal.

Westminster and dodgy dealings? Who'd have thought it?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Not the way the Treasury released it which was apparently highly illegal.

Westminster and dodgy dealings? Who'd have thought it?
		
Click to expand...

I think what would have been more accurate if you had said "Politicians and dodgy dealings? Who'd have thought it?"

Do you honestly believe that come and iScotland, the politicans will be saints, the Companies will cut all prices, and everyone will fart rainbows?!


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 15, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Maybe Putin a offer to some other super power could happen.:smirk:
		
Click to expand...


China or Russia?   They would make really good bedmates


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Did anyone else catch the Radio 4 program discussing the YES/NO vote, on Friday  night I think it was? tuned in halfway through so missed the names, but it really seemed like the arguments being put across by the YES representatives were shot down so easily. Form listening to that, it was hard to wonder how it's got so close, some of there suggestions were just laughable.
		
Click to expand...

Listening to 5Live this morning they were talking to a lady from the No camp and a gentleman from the yes camp 

First the man kept talking over the lady anytime she tried to put her point over 

And the chap also displayed the typical yes campaign answers - scaremongering , don't care about CU or finance or defense just that Scotland will be free of Westminster


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 15, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Did anyone else catch the Radio 4 program discussing the YES/NO vote, on Friday  night I think it was? tuned in halfway through so missed the names, but it really seemed like the arguments being put across by the YES representatives were shot down so easily. Form listening to that, it was hard to wonder how it's got so close, some of there suggestions were just laughable.
		
Click to expand...

Patrick Harvie is one of the good guys on the "Yes" side but I just heard him getting demolished by Jackson Carlaw (a tory!) on the radio phone in. Think "no" might finally be getting their game together, hopefully not too late!


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Patrick Harvie is one of the good guys on the "Yes" side but I just heard him getting demolished by Jackson Carlaw (a tory!) on the radio phone in. Think "no" might finally be getting their game together, hopefully not too late!
		
Click to expand...

Shhhhh! Don't say "tory" out loud, every single person in Scotland hates them remember.


----------



## turkish (Sep 15, 2014)

I know the vote is Thursday but when exactly will we know poll results?


----------



## DCB (Sep 15, 2014)

turkish said:



			I know the vote is Thursday but when exactly will we know poll results?
		
Click to expand...

Should all be done and dusted by mid morning on Friday


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Whatever the outcome we Scots should be congratulated on changing the political landscape rather than being happy to continue with the current charade.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Whatever the outcome we Scots should be congratulated on changing the political landscape rather than being happy to continue with the current charade.
		
Click to expand...

Current charade?


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Listening to 5Live this morning they were talking to a lady from the No camp and a gentleman from the yes camp 

First the man kept talking over the lady anytime she tried to put her point over 

And the chap also displayed the typical yes campaign answers - scaremongering , don't care about CU or finance or defense just that Scotland will be free of Westminster
		
Click to expand...

I heard that as well, sounded just like a lot of the aggressive Yes voters I've bumped into on my travels recently.
No answers just hopes on a wing a a prayer with an anti English tint to it.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 15, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			China or Russia?   They would make really good bedmates 

Click to expand...

I'm slanting towards Chinese as they have more restaurants, not many Reds in the sun bed fights up here.:smirk:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/globe-...rticle20579017/?service=mobile&click=sf_globe


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Not the way the Treasury released it which was apparently highly illegal.
		
Click to expand...

You have evidence for its release, by Treasury, being 'highly illegal'? 



Dodger said:



			Westminster and dodgy dealings? Who'd have thought it?
		
Click to expand...

I think that goes for Politics anywhere. And it wouldn't surprise me if there wasn't a shed-load of spin involved here either!


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And the chap also displayed the typical yes campaign answers - scaremongering , don't care about CU or finance or defense just that Scotland will be free of Westminster
		
Click to expand...

You appear to have a different interpretation of 'scaremongering' to me! Being 'free from Westminster' is the positive thing that Independence (there's a clue in the meaning) is all about! 

It seems to me it's the 'No' side that has done all the scaremongering - especially about Currency and Defence! And a quite legitimate strategy it is too! Far stronger - in a negative campaign - than promoting nebulous 'pride in the Union' positive ones imo.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			It seems to me it's the 'No' side that has done all the scaremongering - especially about Currency and Defence!
		
Click to expand...

In that case you haven't been paying enough attention. Try reading up on what the "yes" lot say about what will happen to the NHS if we stay in the union. Conveniently ignoring the fact that health is entirely devolved already.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			In that case you haven't been paying enough attention. Try reading up on what the "yes" lot say about what will happen to the NHS if we stay in the union. Conveniently ignoring the fact that health is entirely devolved already.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess that counts!  

Scaremongering all round then! 

I said months ago it was going to be an extremely negative campaign.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			You appear to have a different interpretation of 'scaremongering' to me! Being 'free from Westminster' is the positive thing that Independence (there's a clue in the meaning) is all about! 

It seems to me it's the 'No' side that has done all the scaremongering - especially about Currency and Defence! And a quite legitimate strategy it is too! Far stronger - in a negative campaign - than promoting nebulous 'pride in the Union' positive ones imo.
		
Click to expand...

I would suggest you re read my post 

As I said - the yes typical answer to any negative post provided by any company etc is "scaremongering"


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Yeah, I guess that counts!  

Scaremongering all round then! 

*I said months ago it was going to be an extremely negative campaign*.
		
Click to expand...

Isnt every political campaign a negative one ?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Yeah, I guess that counts!  

Scaremongering all round then! 

*I said months ago it was going to be an extremely negative campaign*.
		
Click to expand...




Liverpoolphil said:



			Isnt every political campaign a negative one ?
		
Click to expand...


..plus the NO THANKS campaign starts with a very negative word. So it's always going to be an uphill struggle to promote a positive when there is so much from the YES campaign that must be countered with the opposite (negative) stance


----------



## drdel (Sep 15, 2014)

Any political debate, in fact every argument, is negative because one side is taking a pop at the other's positive views.

Being peed off with Westminster is no different to most who live outside London - but throwing a wobbly and backing away from the collective benefits of the future the potential is not a wise argument.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Beckham come out as a NO.

Keep them coming Cameron, wheeling out fuds like that,who don't have a note anyway, is playing a blinder for YES.

I am sure that Knighthood will be duly delivered.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Isnt every political campaign a negative one ?
		
Click to expand...

No! If that's not being 'negative'!

All sides put their policies for (positive) change forward and voters make a selection.

There may be arguments along the lines of 'that won't work because....' etc. And Opposition will always say Government isn't working properly......

But, overall, the negatives are kept under control because Positive feelings tend to produce more votes.

And, yet again, you were selective about what you read/absorbed! The word 'extremely' was key!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Beckham come out as a NO.

Keep them coming Cameron, wheeling out fuds like that,who don't have a note anyway, is playing a blinder for YES.

I am sure that Knighthood will be duly delivered.
		
Click to expand...


Yes I can see all those No voters changing their mind purely on the basis of what Beckham has said 

He won't make a single difference to either side


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 15, 2014)

drdel said:



			Being peed off with Westminster is no different to most who live outside London...
		
Click to expand...

Maybe so - just so happens that Scotland (as part of the UK but also a nation in it's own right) is in the fortunate position of being able to do something about it - so maybe the rest of the UK outside of London should get their act together.

Also on your statement 




			the collective benefits of the future
		
Click to expand...

Well I am sure the voters of Scotland would be delighted to hear of the detail of the future benefits being part of the UK will provide.  But they better get to it because time is running out.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			No! If that's not being 'negative'!

All sides put their policies for (positive) change forward and voters make a selection.

There may be arguments along the lines of 'that won't work because....' etc. And Opposition will always say Government isn't working properly......

But, overall, the negatives are kept under control because Positive feelings tend to produce more votes.

And, yet again, you were selective about what you read/absorbed! The word 'extremely' was key!
		
Click to expand...

I think you're misunderstanding what LP meant. Or maybe I am. But one of us is.

I took LP to be referring to that nearly all modern political campaigns being "negative politics". It used to be as you describe, but in the last 20 years it seems almost 100% to be "negative".

That's just what I took him to mean though.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I think you're misunderstanding what LP meant. Or maybe I am. But one of us is.

I took LP to be referring to that nearly all modern political campaigns being "negative politics". It used to be as you describe, but in the last 20 years it seems almost 100% to be "negative".

That's just what I took him to mean though.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly what I meant :thup:


----------



## CMAC (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Beckham come out as a NO.

*Keep them coming Cameron, wheeling out fuds like that,who don't have a note anyway, is playing a blinder for YES*.

I am sure that Knighthood will be duly delivered.
		
Click to expand...

He was joined by two more Olympic legends, Sir Steve Redgrave and Baroness Grey-Thompson, who released the following joint statement to the Scottish Daily Mail: â€œIt is clear, in competing side by side, that we are so much greater than the sum of our parts.â€


shame you have to resort to name calling but I suppose thats the YES way


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Yes I can see all those No voters changing their mind purely on the basis of what Beckham has said 

He won't make a single difference to either side
		
Click to expand...

They wouldn't roll him out as a BT supporter if they didn't think some undecided folks would vote NO on the back of it.  I'd rather hope some undecideds won't vote YES because of him supporting BT.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 15, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I think you're misunderstanding what LP meant. Or maybe I am. But one of us is.

I took LP to be referring to that nearly all modern political campaigns being "negative politics". It used to be as you describe, but in the last 20 years it seems almost 100% to be "negative".
		
Click to expand...

So it's nice to have YES trying to put forward a positive vision in the face of all the things that could possibly go wrong.  Yes the vision is flawed and has many challenges - but at least it's POSITIVE.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So it's nice to have YES trying to put forward a positive vision in the face of all the things that could possibly go wrong.  Yes the vision is flawed and has many challenges - but at least it's POSITIVE.
		
Click to expand...

It's that positive it's built of fantasy and fairy dust it appears with holes the size of the Cheddar Gorge

Yes may put forward a lovely fluffy vision of the future but their methods are extremely negative in the attacks they make on people.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So it's nice to have YES trying to put forward a positive vision in the face of all the things that could possibly go wrong.  Yes the vision is flawed and has many challenges - but at least it's POSITIVE.
		
Click to expand...

This is a myth. The yes campaign are using both positive and negative arguments. Nothing wrong with that but the spin that it's their "positive" message vs "scaremongering" is annoying and hypocritical.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So it's nice to have YES trying to put forward a positive vision in the face of all the things that could possibly go wrong.  Yes the vision is flawed and has many challenges - but at least it's POSITIVE.
		
Click to expand...

Telling everyone the NHS will collapse within minutes of NO vote, and that they will have to pay thousands of pounds for a GP visit (I may be exagerating for effect), doesn't count as Negative?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			This is a myth. The yes campaign are using both positive and negative arguments. Nothing wrong with that but the spin that it's their "positive" message vs "scaremongering" is annoying and hypocritical.
		
Click to expand...

But at least there is something positive about self-determination.  It is inevitable that part of making the case for self-determination is to highlight the faults and failings of the alternative and to try and show where such failings can be improved upon.  BT quite validly do exactly the same but have IMO failed to make enough of the POSITIVES about remaining in the UK - and there are many.  But I do not hear them amidst all the loud warnings and risks coming from BT.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 15, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Telling everyone the NHS will collapse within minutes of NO vote, and that they will have to pay thousands of pounds for a GP visit (I may be exagerating for effect), doesn't count as Negative?
		
Click to expand...

Likewise I have heard on a number of occasions how the Scotland benefits from the shared resources etc available to NHS Scotland from across the UK.  But I though that NHS Scotland was autonomous other than as determined by funding through Barnett.  So what is this stuff about shared UK resources?  Maybe there are but I'm not aware of them or how it works.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But at least there is something positive about self-determination.  It is inevitable that part of making the case for self-determination is to highlight the faults and failings of the alternative and to try and show where such failings can be improved upon.  BT quite validly do exactly the same but have IMO failed to make enough of the POSITIVES about remaining in the UK - and there are many.  But I do not hear them amidst all the loud warnings and risks coming from BT.
		
Click to expand...

Agreed, although I think they (BT) are belatedly improving in this aspect.


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			But at least there is something positive about self-determination.  It is inevitable that part of making the case for self-determination is to highlight the faults and failings of the alternative and to try and show where such failings can be improved upon.  BT quite validly do exactly the same but have IMO failed to make enough of the POSITIVES about remaining in the UK - and there are many.  But I do not hear them amidst all the loud warnings and risks coming from BT.
		
Click to expand...

But why is saying "no" about self determination seen as a negative. Surely its about choice, and of choosing what an individual sees as RIGHT. Just because someone says "no" to independence, doesn't mean they're being negative about the future of Scotland as they see it. Why would they vote for a negative outcome?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Yes I can see all those No voters changing their mind purely on the basis of what Beckham has said 

He won't make a single difference to either side
		
Click to expand...

If you think that one of Englandshire's finest casting his support for NO won't make even the slightest bit of difference then you really are not in touch.

The more that these types continue to trot out their support the more power YES will continue to get.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			If you think that one of Englandshire's finest casting his support for NO won't make even the slightest bit of difference then you really are not in touch.

The more that these types continue to trot out their support the more power YES will continue to get.
		
Click to expand...

are you moving back to Scotland to reap what you sow if its (highly unlikely) a YES?

you dont have to answer as thats personal, just curious


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 15, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			But why is saying "no" about self determination seen as a negative. Surely its about choice, and of choosing what an individual sees as RIGHT. Just because someone says "no" to independence, doesn't mean they're being negative about the future of Scotland as they see it. Why would they vote for a negative outcome?
		
Click to expand...

Because they don;t need to be quite so negative about it - they could have really positively promoted the benefits.  Part of the problem was that the benefit for so long was simply the status quo - and for every major plus BT could cite about the status quo, YES would put forward a status quo negative and supplement that with a positive improvement.

And Westminster stood aside saying that they would not get involved as this was Scotland's debate and Scotland's alone - bizarrely missing the fact that much of Scotland was not at all happy with the status quo - no matter how much positive spin could be put on it - it just wasn't cutting it.  Now BT have 'additional powers' and that is so much easier to sell than a tainted and unwanted status quo


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

CMAC said:



			are you moving back to Scotland to reap what you sow if its (highly unlikely) a YES?

you dont have to answer as thats personal, just curious
		
Click to expand...

Happy to answer......The only time I have lived in Scotland was through my later education but the high likelihood is that I will move there for work in the near future. I also currently own property in our fine country, and yes, I am more than ready thank you.:thup:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			If you think that one of Englandshire's finest casting his support for NO won't make even the slightest bit of difference then you really are not in touch.

The more that these types continue to trot out their support the more power YES will continue to get.
		
Click to expand...

Englandshire ? Where is that ? 

More power ? Utter nonsense - if people change votes based on celebs then I expect they are that flakey they will prob change tomorrow again when the wind blows to the south. 

Any other straws you fancy clutching


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Because they don;t need to be quite so negative about it - they could have really positively promoted the benefits.  Part of the problem was that the benefit for so long was simply the status quo - and for every major plus BT could cite about the status quo, *YES would put forward a status quo negative and supplement that with a positive improvement.*

And Westminster stood aside saying that they would not get involved as this was Scotland's debate and Scotland's alone - bizarrely missing the fact that much of Scotland was not at all happy with the status quo - no matter how much positive spin could be put on it - it just wasn't cutting it.  Now BT have 'additional powers' and that is so much easier to sell than a tainted and unwanted status quo
		
Click to expand...

Really ?! Must have missed all these positives or is it the fairy dust again 

Most of the time a negative has been mentioned the response has been "scaremongering" or "we will are it work" or "we don't need a plan b we will make plan a work"

Surely if it's an unwanted status quo then no one will vote No ?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Englandshire ? Where is that ? 

More power ? Utter nonsense - if people change votes based on celebs then I expect they are that flakey they will prob change tomorrow again when the wind blows to the south. 

Any other straws you fancy clutching
		
Click to expand...

I am happy that you believe that.

Keep it up, it's great to see.:thup::thup:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I am happy that you believe that.

Keep it up, it's great to see.:thup::thup:
		
Click to expand...

Englandshire ? Can you not find it ?


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 15, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I think you're misunderstanding what LP meant. Or maybe I am. But one of us is.

I took LP to be referring to that nearly all modern political campaigns being "negative politics". It used to be as you describe, but in the last 20 years it seems almost 100% to be "negative".

That's just what I took him to mean though.
		
Click to expand...

No misunderstanding on my part!

Maybe my 'negative politics' filter is just tuned differently.

But this referendum is definitely 'extremely negative' - and the NHS scaremongering just adds to that impression. 

There is, of course, an element of truth in all such loudly proclaimed claims - Scotland doesn't have total control over the Scottish NHS Budget - just as there will/would be issues with BofE being Scotland's Central Bank.

But the fear factor is what has been driving this for most of the campaign rather than positive solutions - which, given that BT is happy with the current situation, generally comes from the 'Yes' side rather than the 'No' one.

I'm yet to hear a really convincing, quantified, argument from those without a vote (unlike some, I don't try to foist my non-voting attitude on those with a vote, who are entitled to use it as they see fit) as to why it's in Scotland's best interests to stay in the Union. And just to nip an obvious one in the bud, (shared) Defence is certainly not one for me!


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

So after the 'more powers' idea that was hurriedly cobbled together and laughed at last week.... here comes Gordon Brown again with 3 days to go now trying again. Saying, well.... pretty much nothing.

Laughable that the NO have decided to run with this clown who was such a great Chancellor and PM.

1. A permanent role for Scotland in the evolution of the UK:  - *I thought we already had that?? *

The former prime minister has already argued that the UK is on course for major constitutional change even in the event of a No vote. He wants a guarantee that any future constitutional change will be made with Scotland's involvement. Some will fear that without such a guarantee, calls for more powers for England could be debated without Scotland being consulted.

2. A guarantee of fairness: - *Is he suggesting that we're not being treated fairly now? Why are we not being treated fairly now? How are you going to make this measurable*? 

Gordon Brown wants politicians of all unionist parties to sign a statement that the aim of a "modern union" will be one that secures "security and opportunity for all" by "sharing equitably the resources of the nations and regions".

3. A guarantee that the Barnett formula will survive and Scotland will be able to raise taxes to protect spending on the NHS if necessary. - *Ah, but we'll still just be given pocket money? So .... the priorities of the UK will dictate what we then get from what's left? *


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			No misunderstanding on my part!

Maybe my 'negative politics' filter is just tuned differently.

But this referendum is definitely 'extremely negative' - and the NHS scaremongering just adds to that impression. 

There is, of course, an element of truth in all such loudly proclaimed claims - Scotland doesn't have total control over the Scottish NHS Budget - just as there will/would be issues with BofE being Scotland's Central Bank.

But the fear factor is what has been driving this for most of the campaign rather than positive solutions - which, given that BT is happy with the current situation, generally comes from the 'Yes' side rather than the 'No' one.

I'm yet to hear a really convincing, quantified, argument from those without a vote (unlike some, I don't try to foist my non-voting attitude on those with a vote, who are entitled to use it as they see fit) as to why it's in Scotland's best interests to stay in the Union. And just to nip an obvious one in the bud, (shared) Defence is certainly not one for me!
		
Click to expand...

But then what really convincing, quantified argument have you heard for a YES vote.

On the one hand it seems to be vague promises of a land of milk & honey and on the other it is the status quo with, perhaps, a few more devolved powers.

Not exactly overwhelming arguments either way.


----------



## delc (Sep 15, 2014)

Probably the worst thing that could happen for Mr Salmond is for Scotland to win the 'yes' vote for independence. Then he will have to come up with his promised Socialist State, running with oil, milk and honey, which I doubt is realistically possible. If he loses, then he will be able to blame the Tories, the Media and The Establishment, and become a martyr


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			So after the 'more powers' idea that was hurriedly cobbled together and laughed at last week.... here comes Gordon Brown again with 3 days to go now trying again. Saying, well.... pretty much nothing.

Laughable that the NO have decided to run with this *clown *who was such a great Chancellor and PM.

1. A permanent role for Scotland in the evolution of the UK:  - *I thought we already had that?? *

The former prime minister has already argued that the UK is on course for major constitutional change even in the event of a No vote. He wants a guarantee that any future constitutional change will be made with Scotland's involvement. Some will fear that without such a guarantee, calls for more powers for England could be debated without Scotland being consulted.

2. A guarantee of fairness: - *Is he suggesting that we're not being treated fairly now? Why are we not being treated fairly now? How are you going to make this measurable*? 

Gordon Brown wants politicians of all unionist parties to sign a statement that the aim of a "modern union" will be one that secures "security and opportunity for all" by "sharing equitably the resources of the nations and regions".

3. A guarantee that the Barnett formula will survive and Scotland will be able to raise taxes to protect spending on the NHS if necessary. - *Ah, but we'll still just be given pocket money? So .... the priorities of the UK will dictate what we then get from what's left? *

Click to expand...

More cheap insults 

Can't see anything wrong with the NO making statements about what could happen to Scotland if ( when ) there is a No vote 

Or did the Yes campaign want them to stay quiet and not do anything ?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			More cheap insults 

Can't see anything wrong with the NO making statements about what could happen to Scotland if ( when ) there is a No vote 

Or did the Yes campaign want them to stay quiet and not do anything ?
		
Click to expand...

Would you have preferred me to say he was an utterly pathetic leader then?:smirk:

You don't agree with my view that I get but you seem to want to try and start an online fight with anyone who doesn't share your views and it's becoming more and more embarrassing now it really is and I am not the only one that shares that view.:thup:


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 15, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			But then what really convincing, quantified argument have you heard for a YES vote.

On the one hand it seems to be vague promises of a land of milk & honey and on the other it is the status quo with, perhaps, a few more devolved powers.

Not exactly overwhelming arguments either way.
		
Click to expand...

Read The White Paper!

Whether that's convincing is up to the individual!

But it certainly seems, to me, that Scotland has been getting a 'mixed' deal and that Independence is a way of getting a deal more in line with how they want to manage their resources. I have  no doubt that they would survive and prosper as an independent country, though whether they desire to is up to them.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Would you have preferred me to say he was an utterly pathetic leader then?:smirk:

You don't agree with my view that I get but you seem to want to try and start an online fight with anyone who doesn't share your views and it's becoming more and more embarrassing now it really is and I am not the only one that shares that view.:thup:
		
Click to expand...

Not looking to start anything at all 

Just wondered why all we hear from Yes people is cheap insults towards people who would like the union to stay in tact - as suggested before - I guess it helps mask over the massive holes in the yes campaign in regards their policies 

Instead of throwing cheap insults at those people how about post about all the good stuff from the Yes campaign or is there none ? Are the policies that thin it's now just about discrediting the Union or BT or No or whatever it's called. 

So policies 

Defence budget - how will they pay for the required defence force to allow them to control their borders and gain NATO membership ? 

Finance - what currency will they use ? To enable them membership of the EU they will more than likely either need their own currency with their own banks and a creditor or join a CU with UK or have the Euro - what's it to be ? 

Banks and Businesses leaving Scotland post yes - how will an Independant deal with the job losses caused by loss of contracts and companies leaving Scotland ? 

Jobs - understand 20,000 jobs will be created post a yes vote - doing what ? Paid for by who ?

Oil - been on a decline for 15 years - possible ( not definite ) extra barrels in the West area but Â£1.5billion investment needed to even get started with no guarantee of success due to geologically and depth problems

Is that ok for starters ?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Read The White Paper!

Whether that's convincing is up to the individual!

But it certainly seems, to me, that Scotland has been getting a 'mixed' deal and that Independence is a way of getting a deal more in line with how they want to manage their resources. I have  no doubt that they would survive and prosper as an independent country, though whether they desire to is up to them.
		
Click to expand...

The white paper is a waste of space full of promises built on nothing


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Interesting stuff, dodger, I didn't realise you didn't live in Scotland. So you don't actually have a vote then?


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 15, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			But then what really convincing, quantified argument have you heard for a YES vote.

On the one hand it seems to be vague promises of a land of milk & honey and on the other it is the status quo with, perhaps, a few more devolved powers.

Not exactly overwhelming arguments either way.
		
Click to expand...

 Pilgrim Fathers were silly boys , ok.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Interesting stuff, dodger, I didn't realise you didn't live in Scotland. So you don't actually have a vote then?
		
Click to expand...


Has a vote via property owned in Scotland like a few guys I play golf with ( all voting No )

Can't understand why people who don't live in Scotland have a vote due to owning property there 

Know another guy who is English and owns a house near St Andrews and has a vote


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Interesting stuff, dodger, I didn't realise you didn't live in Scotland. So you don't actually have a vote then?
		
Click to expand...

Does the Queen have a vote never mind Dodger.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The white paper is a waste of space full of promises built on nothing
		
Click to expand...

I guess you weren't convinced then! :rofl:



Liverpoolphil said:



			Not looking to start anything at all 

Just wondered why all we hear from Yes people is cheap insults towards people who would like the union to stay in tact - as suggested before - I guess it helps mask over the massive holes in the yes campaign in regards their policies 

Instead of throwing cheap insults at those people how about post about all the good stuff from the Yes campaign or is there none ? Are the policies that thin it's now just about discrediting the Union or BT or No or whatever it's called. 

So policies 

Defence budget - how will they pay for the required defence force to allow them to control their borders and gain NATO membership ? 

Finance - what currency will they use ? To enable them membership of the EU they will more than likely either need their own currency with their own banks and a creditor or join a CU with UK or have the Euro - what's it to be ? 

Banks and Businesses leaving Scotland post yes - how will an Independant deal with the job losses caused by loss of contracts and companies leaving Scotland ? 

Jobs - understand 20,000 jobs will be created post a yes vote - doing what ? Paid for by who ?

Oil - been on a decline for 15 years - possible ( not definite ) extra barrels in the West area but Â£1.5billion investment needed to even get started with no guarantee of success due to geologically and depth problems

Is that ok for starters ?
		
Click to expand...

But if you read The White Paper objectively, you'd see most of these issues were addressed!


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Not looking to start anything at all 

Just wondered why all we hear from Yes people is cheap insults towards people who would like the union to stay in tact - as suggested before - I guess it helps mask over the massive holes in the yes campaign in regards their policies 

Instead of throwing cheap insults at those people how about post about all the good stuff from the Yes campaign or is there none ? Are the policies that thin it's now just about discrediting the Union or BT or No or whatever it's called. 

So policies 

Defence budget - how will they pay for the required defence force to allow them to control their borders and gain NATO membership ? 

Finance - what currency will they use ? To enable them membership of the EU they will more than likely either need their own currency with their own banks and a creditor or join a CU with UK or have the Euro - what's it to be ? 

Banks and Businesses leaving Scotland post yes - how will an Independant deal with the job losses caused by loss of contracts and companies leaving Scotland ? 

Jobs - understand 20,000 jobs will be created post a yes vote - doing what ? Paid for by who ?

Oil - been on a decline for 15 years - possible ( not definite ) extra barrels in the West area but Â£1.5billion investment needed to even get started with no guarantee of success due to geologically and depth problems

Is that ok for starters ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes and you just continue to go around in your little circle.........your posting is becoming more and more comical.

I could fire back with a bloody long list of questions that I have not had answered by the NO's,there are also answers not given 100% to my satisfaction from the YES's and only one of which is on your little list but my mind is made up and frankly I have more to my life than going around in circles with a keyboard warrior.

As I said you don't agree and I don't expect you to but you cannot debate with someone that believes he is 100% correct each and every time...on everything...that sadly in your case is an not possible.:thup:


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 15, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Does the Queen have a vote never mind Dodger.

Click to expand...

She does for the same reason as Dodger apparently - property ownership. Though in her case, I believe she'll to lose a goodly chunk of 'property' if it's a 'Yes'!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Yes and you just continue to go around in your little circle.........your posting is becoming more and more comical.

I could fire back with a bloody long list of questions that I have not had answered by the NO's,there are also answers not given 100% to my satisfaction from the YES's and only one of which is on your little list but my mind is made up and frankly I have more to my life than going around in circles with a keyboard warrior.

As I said you don't agree and I don't expect you to but you cannot debate with someone that believes he is 100% correct each and every time...on everything...that sadly in your case is an not possible.:thup:
		
Click to expand...

So as per yesterday instead of actually addressing the main issues it's just a few little cheap digs 

Not sure where in my post I have even mentioned me being correct 

Not seen these questions you have for the No campaign can you point me to the list ? 

You haven't debated - you have ignored and thrown cheap digs at me - did it yesterday and same again today.


----------



## delc (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Has a vote via property owned in Scotland like a few guys I play golf with ( all voting No )

Can't understand why people who don't live in Scotland have a vote due to owning property there 

Know another guy who is English and owns a house near St Andrews and has a vote
		
Click to expand...

I would have though that folks born in Scotland, but living in other parts of the UK should have got a vote, if English folk living in Scotland do! :mmm:


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So as per yesterday instead of actually addressing the main issues it's just a few little cheap digs 

Not sure where in my post I have even mentioned me being correct 

Not seen these questions you have for the No campaign can you point me to the list ? 

You haven't debated - you have ignored and thrown cheap digs at me - did it yesterday and same again today.
		
Click to expand...

So you want me to list my questions so you can disagree with them as being issues?

I have news for you, I am totally uninterested in what your views are and I aint got time to be bored to death again by your "no,no,no,no" posts.

Enjoy the rest of this thread.:thup:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			So you want me to list my questions so you can disagree with them as being issues?

I have news for you, I am totally uninterested in what your views are and I aint got time to be bored to death again by your "no,no,no,no" posts.

Enjoy the rest of this thread.:thup:
		
Click to expand...

I wanted you to list your questions because I haven't seen them :thup:


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 15, 2014)

delc said:



			I would have though that folks born in Scotland, but living in other parts of the UK should have got a vote, if English folk living in Scotland do! :mmm:
		
Click to expand...

Bit late to the party on this one - just for a change! Though by 4k+ posts is probably a new record! 

My view too, and not just living in UK imo. But apparently deemed unworkable by all parties!


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			She does for the same reason as Dodger apparently - property ownership. Though in her case, I believe she'll to lose a goodly chunk of 'property' if it's a 'Yes'!
		
Click to expand...

How much  would be a fair rent for HER property's, including bedroom tax in Euros or Sterling.oo:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			How much  would be a fair rent for HER property's, including bedroom tax in Euros or Sterling.oo:
		
Click to expand...

Is it just the one property ? Balmoral ?


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Not sure where in my post I have even mentioned me being correct
		
Click to expand...



Is that an admission that you might occasionally be less than correct, or perhaps even wrong? 

Quick! Call the police! Someone has hijacked LPP's Userid! :rofl:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:





Is that an admission that you might occasionally be less than correct, or perhaps even wrong? 

Quick! Call the police! Someone has hijacked LPP's Userid! :rofl:
		
Click to expand...


I'm sure there is a kettle around here somewhere


----------



## delc (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Bit late to the party on this one - just for a change! Though by 4k+ posts is probably a new record! 

My view too, and not just living in UK imo. But apparently deemed unworkable by all parties!
		
Click to expand...

Yes, many of my Scottish friends (living in England) are a bit miffed about not getting a vote!


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Is it just the one property ? Balmoral ?
		
Click to expand...

I think She has most of the place surrounded!

Balmoral is not part of the Crown Estate, but there is plenty that is! Crown Estate income was/is something of a niggle for the Nats who made a grab for the income after they won in 2011


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Is it just the one property ? Balmoral ?
		
Click to expand...

 The Royals own a great deal of land and properties in Scotland not sure exactly how much.

 If there is a yes vote she will still be the Queen of Scotland [ not counting John Barrowman of course] .

Oh!  Balmoral is my address too but a different postcode.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I think She has most of the place surrounded!

Balmoral is not part of the Crown Estate, but there is plenty that is! Crown Estate income was/is something of a niggle for the Nats who made a grab for the income after they won in 2011
		
Click to expand...

Balmoral is owned by the Royal Family and Trustees  - crown estate I don't believe was mentioned :mmm:


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:





Is that an admission that you might occasionally be less than correct, or perhaps even wrong? 

Quick! Call the police! Someone has hijacked LPP's Userid! :rofl:
		
Click to expand...

Frapped i think is the term ?.


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 15, 2014)

I still want to know exactly what this "fairer society" is which keeps getting mentioned by Yes campaigners.
Can someone expand on it for me?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Sep 15, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Read The White Paper!

Whether that's convincing is up to the individual!

But it certainly seems, to me, that Scotland has been getting a 'mixed' deal and that Independence is a way of getting a deal more in line with how they want to manage their resources. I have  no doubt that they would survive and prosper as an independent country, though whether they desire to is up to them.
		
Click to expand...

I have done and a more gloriously vague document is hard to imagine. 

The politicians must presumably have provided the Civil Servants with a remit for drafting it and those same Civil Servants must have spent an age trying to make a serious White Paper from that same remit.

Utopia or Status Quo! My what a choice.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Has a vote via property owned in Scotland like a few guys I play golf with ( all voting No )

Can't understand why people who don't live in Scotland have a vote due to owning property there 

Know another guy who is English and owns a house near St Andrews and has a vote
		
Click to expand...

Owning property in Scotland does not entitle you to vote, residency is the requirement.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Owning property in Scotland does not entitle you to vote, residency is the requirement.
		
Click to expand...

Can you not be a registered voter in Scotland though but not residing in Scotland ?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Can you not be a registered voter in Scotland though but not residing in Scotland ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes for a general election (if you are outside the uk) not for the referendum.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Yes for a general election (if you are outside the uk) not for the referendum.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sure service personnel are able to vote if they are registered to vote in Scotland but currently residing outside of Scotland ?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Can you not be a registered voter in Scotland though but not residing in Scotland ?
		
Click to expand...


Yes you most certainly can.

My residence is my IOB address soley for the purpose of voting in this.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Yes you most certainly can.
		
Click to expand...

You don't reside in Scotland but have a vote due to being registered to vote in Scotland ? Is that right

So who is living the property where you are registered ?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Yes you most certainly can.

My residence is my IOB address soley for the purpose of voting in this.
		
Click to expand...

Don't know enough about your exact situation but it sounds like you may be committing electoral fraud.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Don't know enough about your exact situation but it sounds like you may be committing electoral fraud.
		
Click to expand...

You are right,you don't.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			You are right,you don't.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed. But that wasn't a denial, was it?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			You are right,you don't.
		
Click to expand...

So are you like the forces and their voting ? You are registered at an address in Scotland ( parents etc ) but work and live outside Scotland ?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Indeed. But that wasn't a denial, was it?
		
Click to expand...

I'm not confirming or denying anything.

I can confirm I have been given a vote.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I'm not confirming or denying anything.

I can confirm I have been given a vote.
		
Click to expand...

If you're not committing fraud, it's a fairly easy thing to deny.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 15, 2014)

https://www.facebook...864793176864927


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2014)

Dodger said:



https://www.facebook...864793176864927

Click to expand...


Link doesn't work


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 15, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Link doesn't work
		
Click to expand...

Dodger admit it you've just found out that your new bride is a Rangers fan, and she owns the house.
Sorry pal i just couldn't resist. :cheers:


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 16, 2014)

Some essential reading about the nature of the yes campaign and exploding the myth of a utopian independent Scotland.....

http://wakeupscotland.wordpress.com...yes-why-i-joined-yes-and-why-i-changed-to-no/


----------



## Dodger (Sep 16, 2014)

http://theconversation.com/scotland-will-not-be-offered-devo-max-after-a-no-vote-heres-why-31500


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 16, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29213416


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 16, 2014)

So in today's Daily Retard we have - with two days to referendum day - a joint (signed) statement from the W3 promising more powers and no change to funding (via the Burnett formula).  

Putting aside for a moment questions voters could reasonably ask about this statement - this is either total unplanned back-of-the-envelope panic by Westminster - or an incredibly cynical and disrespectful ploy to disrupt and confuse the electorate - there being simply not enough time to determine, discuss and debate what this joint statement means to Scotland.  

It is frankly disgraceful and incredible that Westminster has come up with a statement such as this at this very late stage.  Anyway - they reap what they sow.


----------



## IanG (Sep 16, 2014)

Peter Jones's piece from today's Scotsman to enjoy,

http://www.scotsman.com/news/peter-jones-blind-nationalism-doesn-t-add-up-1-3542672

Look out for quisling, lickspittle and snake oil - that is as close to ragin' as a North Berwick member can get


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 16, 2014)

Also starting to see a lot of pictures of people's Facebook where they are saying that anyone who votes No is a traitor - quite sad to see that


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So in today's Daily Retard we have - with two days to referendum day - a joint (signed) statement promising more powers and no change to funding (via the Burnett formula).  

Putting aside for a moment questions voters could reasonably ask about this statement - this is either total unplanned back-of-the-envelope panic by Westminster - or an incredibly cynical and disrespectful ploy to disrupt and confuse the electorate - there being simply not enough time to determine, discuss and debate what this joint statement means to Scotland.  

It is frankly disgraceful and incredible that Westminster has come up with a statement such as this at this very late stage.  Anyway - they reap what they sow.
		
Click to expand...

Again is it not what you expect to see in a campaign 

What do you expect Westminster to do - sit there and do nothing ?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 16, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Again is it not what you expect to see in a campaign 

What do you expect Westminster to do - sit there and do nothing ?
		
Click to expand...

Come on! This is not local council stuff with guys playing silly games - this is the future of the country.  So you tell me LP - which is it - chaos or cynicism from Westminster? If it is 'playing politics' then at this stage it is a dodgy game of poker to play,

That said I think it'll be enough to sway things to a NO but I honestly don't think this will do them any favours other than maybe saving the Union.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Come on! This is not local council stuff with guys playing silly games - this is the future of the country.  So you tell me LP - which is it - chaos or cynicism from Westminster? If it is 'playing politics' then at this stage it is a dodgy game of poker to play,

That said I think it'll be enough to sway things to a NO but I honestly don't think this will do them any favours other than maybe saving the Union.
		
Click to expand...

Are you really that naive you can't see a lot of things that are said and done by both sides of the campaign are done purely for someone's vote 

Sides are playing their trump cards 

No doubt the Yes campaign will play one ( if they have any )


----------



## One Planer (Sep 16, 2014)

I heard on the news while driving to work today that Mr Salmond is promising more jobs should a YES prevail.

How can he make guarantees like this when the entire running of the YES campaign has been so vague on ALL the key issues.

He can't guarantee what currency will be used, but he can guarantee jobs


----------



## One Planer (Sep 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



*Come on! This is not local council stuff with guys playing silly games - this is the future of the country.  So you tell me LP - which is it - chaos or cynicism from Westminster? If it is 'playing politics' then at this stage it is a dodgy game of poker to play,
*
That said I think it'll be enough to sway things to a NO but I honestly don't think this will do them any favours other than maybe saving the Union.
		
Click to expand...

And Salmond has been crystal clear on every issue of the YES?


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Come on! This is not local council stuff with guys playing silly games - this is the future of the country.  So you tell me LP - which is it - chaos or cynicism from Westminster? If it is 'playing politics' then at this stage it is a dodgy game of poker to play,

That said I think it'll be enough to sway things to a NO but I honestly don't think this will do them any favours other than maybe saving the Union.
		
Click to expand...

Is there actually anything other than hot air in that message? If it's the 'signed vow' that I saw, then it's all just political faff!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 16, 2014)

Gareth said:



			I heard on the news while driving to work today that Mr Salmond is promising more jobs should a YES prevail.

How can he make guarantees like this when the entire running of the YES campaign has been so vague on ALL the key issues.

He can't guarantee what currency will be used, but he can guarantee jobs 

Click to expand...

It's been asked what jobs he is creating but no answer to clarify what the jobs are

Found a few of the new jobs 




And paid using these


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			She does for the same reason as Dodger apparently - property ownership. Though in her case, I believe she'll to lose a goodly chunk of 'property' if it's a 'Yes'!
		
Click to expand...

Hopefully.But that's another debate!

Anyway, I've been away for a few days, what did i miss?


----------



## Birchy (Sep 16, 2014)

Gareth said:



			I heard on the news while driving to work today that Mr Salmond is promising more jobs should a YES prevail.

How can he make guarantees like this when the entire running of the YES campaign has been so vague on ALL the key issues.

He can't guarantee what currency will be used, but he can guarantee jobs 

Click to expand...

Good point. Yet there is only one side playing games? :rofl:


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Hopefully.But that's another debate!

Anyway, I've been away for a few days, what did i miss?

View attachment 12268

Click to expand...

Oh Adi.

What a ridiculous poster. Even if it is mostly true, which I do doubt, then it comes across as so ridiculous and biased that it's laughable.

You've not missed much. That's probably because YES still haven't actually said anything of note, yet. They've said quite a few times they don't like how things are presented, but that's about it 

Oh, and Dodger and LP are now best friends and considering eloping to Scotland.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Oh Adi.

What a ridiculous poster. Even if it is mostly true, which I do doubt, then it comes across as so ridiculous and biased that it's laughable.

You've not missed much. That's probably because YES still haven't actually said anything of note, yet. They've said quite a few times they don't like how things are presented, but that's about it 

Oh, and Dodger and LP are now best friends and considering eloping to Scotland.
		
Click to expand...

Thought you'd like it! I think there is a basis for a reasonable argument in there, it's just framed incorrectly..

WAs down in Kirkcudbrightshire and it's quite amazing how many landowners down that way have erected massive NoThanks signs in their fields.I explained to my son that that one farmer, with all this land,has the same vote as the guy living in a council house in Castle Douglas.

The eternal beauty of democracy, which I think us Scots have shown the world we're participating in quite perfectly.I love it.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



View attachment 12268

Click to expand...

Fair amount of bull in that flyer!

Certainly agree with a couple of points - that's the way the Barnett formula works. But none of those CapEx projects actually cost Scotland. And the Civil List hasn't existed for years!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			The eternal beauty of democracy, which I think us Scots have shown the world we're participating in quite perfectly.I love it.
		
Click to expand...

Some truth there but, no, not perfectly at all. 

A complete lack of debate on the yes side (see the link I posted this morning) where any dissent is stifled. Aggressive barracking and vilification of anyone speaking up for "no" and paranoid delusions of bias whenever the media report something that doesn't fit with the "cult of yes" propaganda.

On the other hand, outside of the official campaigns, you are correct we are all engaged and discussing the issues.... with varying degrees of intelligence, knowledge and insight.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Hopefully.But that's another debate!

Anyway, I've been away for a few days, what did i miss?

View attachment 12268

Click to expand...

hahahaha! lets ignore the facts and put up a cartoon with lies on it...........for the gullible


I am seriously very worried for Scotland if these blind sheep get to power. My Snr SNP 'insider' (remember him) is saying that it's say anything to get the YES they covet then deal with it all afterwards (politically) when there is NO TURNING BACK! GOD Help us!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Some truth there but, no, not perfectly at all. 

A complete lack of debate on the yes side (see the link I posted this morning) where any dissent is stifled. Aggressive barracking and vilification of anyone speaking up for "no" and paranoid delusions of bias whenever the media report something that doesn't fit with the "cult of yes" propaganda.

On the other hand, outside of the official campaigns, you are correct we are all engaged and discussing the issues.... with varying degrees of intelligence, knowledge and insight.
		
Click to expand...

Just read it, quite interesting.I think he was always a No Thanks voter and was never convinced by yes anyway.He does raise a few reasonable points, but I think I've offered reasonable solutions to pretty much anything he asks...if you missed them, ask away and I'll attempt to try.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Just read it, quite interesting.I think he was always a No Thanks voter and was never convinced by yes anyway.He does raise a few reasonable points, but I think I've offered reasonable solutions to pretty much anything he asks...if you missed them, ask away and I'll attempt to try.
		
Click to expand...

Adi, why could you have not stood for YES instead of Salmond? I feel like you actually think about things and what you want to happen! The whole debate might have gone completely differently.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 16, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Some truth there but, no, not perfectly at all. 

A complete lack of debate on the yes side (see the link I posted this morning) where any dissent is stifled. Aggressive barracking and vilification of anyone speaking up for "no" and paranoid delusions of bias whenever the media report something that doesn't fit with the "cult of yes" propaganda.

On the other hand, outside of the official campaigns, you are correct we are all engaged and discussing the issues.... with varying degrees of intelligence, knowledge and insight.
		
Click to expand...

well put FD, you are more stateswoman in your posts than I. I'm very worried and dismayed about the blind following YES have, from schoolkids to the man on the street repeating Salmond about a 'fairer and better society' but none of them incl Salmond has one iota of substance to back it up.

As one tweeted yesterday "It will be wonderful and everything in Scotland will be better and we'll all be farting rainbows"


----------



## CMAC (Sep 16, 2014)

I may wake up on Friday and my right to be BRITISH has been taken away! NO one has the right to do that to me.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 16, 2014)

Can I ask, yet another question.

We know the vote is September 18th.

Can I ask when was the referendum originally instigated an the question of independence posed?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I may wake up on Friday and my right to be BRITISH has been taken away! NO one has the right to do that to me.
		
Click to expand...

Britian is an island, unless you move or fracking is really bad, you'll always be British


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Britian is an island, unless you move or fracking is really bad, you'll always be British
		
Click to expand...


But he will no longer have a British Passport and his nationality will no longer be British. 

He will be Scottish and Scottish only with a new as yet determined passport.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 16, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Adi, why could you have not stood for YES instead of Salmond? I feel like you actually think about things and what you want to happen! The whole debate might have gone completely differently.
		
Click to expand...

I have an image of the yes campaign allocating "independence experts" to win hearts and minds one ill-informed internet forum a time. Adi is just lucky he got us.....


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 16, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Are you really that naive you can't see a lot of things that are said and done by both sides of the campaign are done purely for someone's vote 

Sides are playing their trump cards 

No doubt the Yes campaign will play one ( if they have any )
		
Click to expand...

So you agree it is a cynical and disrespectful ploy - hallelujah!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So you agree it is a cynical and disrespectful ploy - hallelujah!
		
Click to expand...


It's politics - it happens from both sides of the fence - are you really surprised ?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So you agree it is a cynical and disrespectful ploy - hallelujah!
		
Click to expand...

Many of your postings on this thread have been rather strange, some indecipherable in fact.

Are you suggesting that the no side shouldn't be campaigning at this stage? I really can't understand what the problem is.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 16, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It's politics - it happens from both sides of the fence - are you really surprised ?
		
Click to expand...

I guess not. But it rather shows that Westminster politicians could really give a monkeys about whether this very, very late intervention will make a decision really difficult and possibly upsetting for some voters.  They just don't care as long as they achieve their own ends.  I'd prefer that the intervention is chaos and panic - I fear it may be cynical.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I guess not. But it rather shows that Westminster politicians could really give a monkeys about whether this very, very late intervention will make a decision really difficult and possibly upsetting for some voters.  They just don't care as long as they achieve their own ends.  I'd prefer that the intervention is chaos and panic - I fear it may be cynical.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but I maybe a little naive in regards politics but you appear to be with the fairies 

This is what I would expect to see politicians doing 

Being shocked about it must mean you are even more naive than me. 

Again though it's people just worrying about how a message is delivered as opposed to what they are saying


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 16, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I guess not. But it rather shows that Westminster politicians could really give a monkeys about whether this very, very late intervention will make a decision really difficult and possibly upsetting for some voters.  They just don't care as long as they achieve their own ends.  I'd prefer that the intervention is chaos and panic - I fear it may be cynical.
		
Click to expand...

You've outdone yourself this time!

Better Together shouldn't campaign because they might be upsetting some people. O.......K..... then


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 16, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			You've outdone yourself this time!

Better Together shouldn't campaign because they might be upsetting some people. O.......K..... then 

Click to expand...

That's not what he said.


He said they shouldn't campaign, because it might make the decision tough for some people. And that would be mean.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 16, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			That's not what he said.


He said they shouldn't campaign, because it might make the decision tough for some people. And that would be mean.
		
Click to expand...

Well, after all, they've been mean to the people of Scotland for 300 years........


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Adi, why could you have not stood for YES instead of Salmond? I feel like you actually think about things and what you want to happen! The whole debate might have gone completely differently.
		
Click to expand...

YES is so much more than Eck, just like NO THANKS is so much more than Darling.I reckon I'd do pretty well debating anyone on this, face to face with all the nonsense put to one side.I'd present a different image of what I'd like Scotland to look like, just like many others would too.That's the defination of YES I think, a broach church of ideas for Scotland under one banner.

NO THANKS are also made up of many different parties and philosophies,  but my problem is they're all offering the same idea of a Scotland within the union of crowns.Nothing different, nothing exciting, nothing inventive.

OK, a promise of new powers to Holyrood, but unable to agree what they are.Then they have to present them to Parliament and MPs from Devon and Norfolk have to agree to further powers, costing money and explain that to their electorate? Can't see that happening, can anyone? SO nothing concrete in the new powers and the issue of getting it thru parliament.

I propose the following for iScotland:

10 year currency union= 10 year trident storage at Coulport
During 10 years iScotland has 3 board members on BoE, no undercutting of tax regimes either side of border and after 10 years, iScot floats own currency pegged 1:1 for a defined period of time

Westminster honours their obligation to pay pensions for all current pensioners until indy day.Anyone 60/65 after that is the sole responsibility of Holyrood.

National debt: Scotland accepts 10% of  ALL the debt along with 10% of ALL assets

rUK actively promotes iScotland entering EU, iScotland actively endorses rUK keeping full rebate

I think that sounds fair and equitable to both sides?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 16, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I'm sorry but I maybe a little naive in regards politics but you appear to be with the fairies 

This is what I would expect to see politicians doing 

Being shocked about it must mean you are even more naive than me. 

Again though it's people just worrying about how a message is delivered as opposed to what they are saying
		
Click to expand...

I am just expecting too much.  I was disappointed that Cameron said about a year ago that he wasn't going to get involved - that this was something that Scotland had to sort out.  I was disappointed because I couldn't see how it could be and how westminster *could *keep disengaged - the outcome being too important for all concerned.

And so it comes to pass that at the last moment - feigning panic - the W3 come storming on.

I accept criticisms of what may seem a confusing position I take.

As noted previously I am at heart 100% YES.  As an outsider of 30yrs I look in on the debate and reflect on all the rubbish I have heard talked by Scots over that time about England, the English and Westminster.  And on that reflection and looking in I am amazed to find that *had *I a vote on Thursday I might well vote NO.  But that is a conclusion I reached based upon my experiences as an outsider.  Had I lived in Scotland these last 30yrs my suspicion is that I would vote YES.

And so in my mind I take a relatively neutral stance - primarily being protective of YES against disinformation and misrepresentation of their position without actually promoting it.  And the converse is that I find it difficult to argue against many NO positions on Union - but I am not inclined to promote them as I can understand the alternatives posited by YES.


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			YES is so much more than Eck, just like NO THANKS is so much more than Darling.I reckon I'd do pretty well debating anyone on this, face to face with all the nonsense put to one side.I'd present a different image of what I'd like Scotland to look like, just like many others would too.That's the defination of YES I think, a broach church of ideas for Scotland under one banner.

NO THANKS are also made up of many different parties and philosophies,  but my problem is they're all offering the same idea of a Scotland within the union of crowns.Nothing different, nothing exciting, nothing inventive.

OK, a promise of new powers to Holyrood, but unable to agree what they are.Then they have to present them to Parliament and MPs from Devon and Norfolk have to agree to further powers, costing money and explain that to their electorate? Can't see that happening, can anyone? SO nothing concrete in the new powers and the issue of getting it thru parliament.

I propose the following for iScotland:

10 year currency union= 10 year trident storage at Coulport
During 10 years iScotland has 3 board members on BoE, no undercutting of tax regimes either side of border and after 10 years, iScot floats own currency pegged 1:1 for a defined period of time

Westminster honours their obligation to pay pensions for all current pensioners until indy day.Anyone 60/65 after that is the sole responsibility of Holyrood.

National debt: Scotland accepts 10% of  ALL the debt along with 10% of ALL assets

rUK actively promotes iScotland entering EU, iScotland actively endorses rUK keeping full rebate

I think that sounds fair and equitable to both sides?
		
Click to expand...

Id vote for you Adi, especially if you promised to stop poncing free rounds at my club every other week


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 16, 2014)

The trouble is you can propose whatever you like for iScotland, and everyone is and the contradictions are there for all to see.

Besides, no matter how much you say it's not about Salmond the truth is that the foundations of this fledgling nation will be laid by Salmond and the SNP along with their best mates Souter and Murdoch.

There's the utopian "cult of yes" message that so many have bought into (and, in fairness also the opposing "doomsday" scenario) and then there is the reality.


----------



## DCB (Sep 16, 2014)

The trouble is that the White Paper is based on the SNP vision of where they would like to take Scotland after a Yes vote.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Besides, no matter how much you say it's not about Salmond the truth is that the foundations of this fledgling nation will be laid by Salmond and the SNP along with their best mates Souter and Murdoch.
		
Click to expand...

This is quote simply incorrect.Of course Salmond will participate in any kind of negotiation, it would be bizarre to suggest otherwise.But Murdoch/Souter certainly won't just as The Barclay Brothers and Eddie Izzard won't.

Negotiation will be cross party/no party and already Carmichael has indicated he'd be involved, as will Darling/Brown/Davidson and any other politician who's been involved in the debate.


----------



## IanG (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Negotiation will be cross party/no party and already Carmichael has indicated he'd be involved, as will Darling/Brown/Davidson and any other politician who's been involved in the debate.
		
Click to expand...

While that may be true in terms of who sits round the table, the only two who really matter  are whoever is in charge in Holyrood and Westminster - they after all will be the ones signing off on any agreement. Whether that is Salmond & Cameron or some others, time alone will tell.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			This is quote simply incorrect.Of course Salmond will participate in any kind of negotiation, it would be bizarre to suggest otherwise.But Murdoch/Souter certainly won't just as The Barclay Brothers and Eddie Izzard won't.

Negotiation will be cross party/no party and already Carmichael has indicated he'd be involved, as will Darling/Brown/Davidson and any other politician who's been involved in the debate.
		
Click to expand...

But it would be negotiation based around the SNP agenda. Set by Salmond and paid for by Souter. Sorry but you can't just gloss over that.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Britian is an island, unless you move or fracking is really bad, you'll always be British
		
Click to expand...

so in my head I'll be British? but not in real life. Sounds like the basis of the whole YES campaign.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			But it would be negotiation based around the SNP agenda. Set by Salmond and paid for by Souter. Sorry but you can't just gloss over that.
		
Click to expand...

No it won't be!The white paper isn't giving Salmond or anyone else the right to negotiate with westminster based on that.The white paper is the blueprint for the 1st SNP election manifesto, one I'll be rejecting at the ballot box.

The crappily  named 'team scotland' who negotiate with westminster will probably include Gordon Brown, Jim Murphy,Ruth Davidson,Patrick Harvie,Alistair Carmichael,Douglas Alexander,Stuart Hosie to name a few. Now if you think that collection of vipers will all back the negotiating stance of Eck you think less of them than I do, which is pretty impressive.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

IanG said:



			While that may be true in terms of who sits round the table, the only two who really matter  are whoever is in charge in Holyrood and Westminster - they after all will be the ones signing off on any agreement. Whether that is Salmond & Cameron or some others, time alone will tell.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I disagree in the strongest sense. The Scottish team won't be the incumbent govt, it'll be a selection of all parties.I'd imagine the same will be of team rUK, for no other reason that both sides can share the blame as well as the glory.Collective responsibility taken to the nth degree.

I also think there will be more than two signatures on the document, and rightly so,as the momentus choices they'll be making shouldn't be the sole responsibility of two people.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm sorry, but I disagree in the strongest sense. The Scottish team won't be the incumbent govt, it'll be a selection of all parties.I'd imagine the same will be of team rUK, for no other reason that both sides can share the blame as well as the glory.Collective responsibility taken to the nth degree.

I also think there will be more than two signatures on the document, and rightly so,as the momentus choices they'll be making shouldn't be the sole responsibility of two people.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting.

How you you, as a YES voter, think the people signing/negotiating/etc should be chosen? I would imagine that it would deserve another vote, but I'm interested to hear your thoughts


----------



## IanG (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm sorry, but I disagree in the strongest sense. The Scottish team won't be the incumbent govt, it'll be a selection of all parties.I'd imagine the same will be of team rUK, for no other reason that both sides can share the blame as well as the glory.Collective responsibility taken to the nth degree.

I also think there will be more than two signatures on the document, and rightly so,as the momentus choices they'll be making shouldn't be the sole responsibility of two people.
		
Click to expand...


I don't disagree that then team on both sides will be a broad church (as it should be) but when push comes to shove those with the current electoral mandate will wield the most clout.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Interesting.

How you you, as a YES voter, think the people signing/negotiating/etc should be chosen? I would imagine that it would deserve another vote, but I'm interested to hear your thoughts
		
Click to expand...

For Scotland, I think it's already started.Salmond will obviously be in the group and he's already invited Carmichael and Darling.I'd guess either Ruth Davidson or Annabel Goldie will be in there.Jim Murphy has been at the front of Labour so he's in.Stuart Hosie is leader of The SNP at Westminster so him too.Gordon Brown is a Scottish MP so I think he'd be invited.John Swinney and Johan Lamont.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

IanG said:



			I don't disagree that then team on both sides will be a broad church (as it should be) but when push comes to shove those with the current electoral mandate will wield the most clout.
		
Click to expand...

For Scotland, none of them have an electoral mandate for iScotland!


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Negotiation will be cross party/no party and already Carmichael has indicated he'd be involved, as will Darling/Brown/Davidson and any other politician who's been involved in the debate.
		
Click to expand...

This seems to be a classic historic Scottish weakness. Win the major battle, then waste the opportunity fighting amongst themselves!  Hopefully the fishy pair can actually lead them rather than be usurped by the has-beens!


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			For Scotland, none of them have an electoral mandate for iScotland!
		
Click to expand...

On a side, lighter note, everytime someone writes iScotland, it makes me think that they will be sponsored by Apple. I hope it doesn't mean Apple will force a load of bagpipe songs onto my iPhone, like they did with U2!


----------



## Dodger (Sep 16, 2014)

How convenient........

Another orchestrated move in using a regular donor's company in the lead 'battle'?

Surely not?:smirk:

http://citywire.co.uk/money/pound-lifts-off-lows-as-betfair-pays-out-on-scottish-no/a772804


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 16, 2014)

dodger said:



			how convenient........

Another orchestrated move in using a regular donor's company in the lead 'battle'?

Surely not?:smirk:

http://citywire.co.uk/money/pound-lifts-off-lows-as-betfair-pays-out-on-scottish-no/a772804

Click to expand...

it's a conspiracy!!!!!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 16, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			it's a conspiracy!!!!!
		
Click to expand...

*The oil price meanwhile looks on course to register its biggest quarterly loss since in more than two years. Brent crude is trading at $97.7 per barrel, and is down around 13% over the quarter, as weaker than expected economic data from the US and China took its toll.*

That must be a bit of pain to read


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 16, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



*The oil price meanwhile looks on course to register its biggest quarterly loss since in more than two years. Brent crude is trading at $97.7 per barrel, and is down around 13% over the quarter, as weaker than expected economic data from the US and China took its toll.*

That must be a bit of pain to read
		
Click to expand...

That must be a conspiracy as well.

The whole oil industry is against iScotland.


----------



## DCB (Sep 16, 2014)

I wouldn't worry, after a No is returned on Friday it'll all be water under the bridge


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 16, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			That must be a conspiracy as well.

The whole oil industry is against iScotland.
		
Click to expand...


Long list of people against iScotland it appears


----------



## CMAC (Sep 16, 2014)

Dodger said:



			How convenient........

*Another orchestrated move in using a regular donor's company in the lead 'battle'?

Surely not*?:smirk:

http://citywire.co.uk/money/pound-lifts-off-lows-as-betfair-pays-out-on-scottish-no/a772804

Click to expand...

correct, it's not- they are stating their finite figs- another attack on presentation over content tedious!


----------



## CMAC (Sep 16, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			On a side, lighter note, everytime someone writes iScotland, it makes me think that they will be sponsored by Apple. I hope it doesn't mean Apple will force a load of bagpipe songs onto my iPhone, like they did with U2!
		
Click to expand...

U2 forced a lot of bagpipe songs on you?


I also think iPhone when I see iScot etc 

someone posted above saying Rest of UK as R o fuk.......could be quite apt come Friday


----------



## CMAC (Sep 16, 2014)

The Herald is the latest Paper to support a NO VOTE :whoo:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comme...ure-that-meets-the-aspirations-of-sc.25295912


a snippet and a view I agree with.....

But the supporters of independence do not hold the monopoly on caring passionately about Scotland and wanting change to help bring about a more just, equal and prosperous society.

The question is whether that vision is best pursued as part of the UK or outside it. We keenly understand the appeal of independence. Who would not want to believe that, by putting a cross on a ballot paper, Scotland could be set on a sure path to becoming a country where poverty, inequality and unpopular governments are vanquished?

But, amid all the excitement and hope generated by the prospect of wholesale change, it is important to recognise that aspiration, assertion and belief in the benefits of independence are not enough.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 16, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Somebody tell him please:lol:
		
Click to expand...

I'd rather you did as


----------



## IanG (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			For Scotland, none of them have an electoral mandate for iScotland!
		
Click to expand...

No one has an electoral mandate for iScotland until it exists and hold an election. 

IMHO - the divorce settlement will be  agreed by those in positions of power within the existing structures. They may well take advice/input from all and sundry and try to broker a consensus view.    Ultimately though the SNP would be entitled to feel they have the authority and mandate to lead as they led the winning YES campaign.


----------



## NWJocko (Sep 16, 2014)

CMAC said:



			The Herald is the latest Paper to support a NO VOTE :whoo:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comme...ure-that-meets-the-aspirations-of-sc.25295912


a snippet and a view I agree with.....

*But the supporters of independence do not hold the monopoly on caring passionately about Scotland and wanting change to help bring about a more just, equal and prosperous society.
*
The question is whether that vision is best pursued as part of the UK or outside it. We keenly understand the appeal of independence. Who would not want to believe that, by putting a cross on a ballot paper, Scotland could be set on a sure path to becoming a country where poverty, inequality and unpopular governments are vanquished?

But, amid all the excitement and hope generated by the prospect of wholesale change, it is important to recognise that aspiration, assertion and belief in the benefits of independence are not enough.
		
Click to expand...

The bit in bold is important and a good point.

One of the most disappointing things about the debate for me is the attitude of some Yes voters towards anyone from the No side of the fence who is brave enough to stick their head above the parapet.

Some of the abuse they get from Yes voters is ridiculous and completely uncalled for. Their attitude seems to be that you can't be a patriotic scot and vote No!

I've seen friendships end over the attitude of some of my Yes friends to No which is just sad. I worry about the reaction from the Yes group if the vote is No.....


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 16, 2014)

Interesting time at Trafalgar Sq yesterday evening.  Most people I spoke to are genuinely upsetwith the Party Leaders, and not for reacting to late but in agreeing to thereferendum in the first place. The feeling was that on a matter that was goingto have implications for the whole of the UK, the whole of the UK should havehad the opportunity to vote.  But hey ho,as my grammar and spelling coach on hear keeps sprouting off about democracy Iwonder why it can only be on the Yes voterâ€™s terms.
Like the well know song goes â€œWhen the going gets tough,the tough get goingâ€.  Its seems like itsgoing to have to change to â€œWhen the going gets tough, lets jump shipâ€.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

Old Skier said:



Interesting time at Trafalgar Sq yesterday evening.  Most people I spoke to are genuinely *upsetwith* the Party Leaders, and not for reacting *to* late but in agreeing to *thereferendum* in the first place. The feeling was that on a matter that was *goingto* have implications for the whole of the UK, the whole of the UK should *havehad* the opportunity to vote.  But hey ho,as my grammar and spelling coach on hear keeps sp*r*outing off about democracy *Iwonder* why it can only be on the Yes voter*â€™s* terms.
Like the well know song goes â€œWhen the going gets tough,the tough get goingâ€.  *Its* seems like itsgoing to have to change to â€œWhen the going gets tough, lets jump shipâ€.

Click to expand...

Happy to help. :thup:


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Happy to help. :thup:
		
Click to expand...

You may have missed one.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			No it won't be!The white paper isn't giving Salmond or anyone else the right to negotiate with westminster based on that.The white paper is the blueprint for the 1st SNP election manifesto, one I'll be rejecting at the ballot box.
		
Click to expand...

Ok, let's go with this. I realise the white paper is the snp's vision but my understanding, which may well be wrong, is that it will form the basis of the negotiations between Friday and the 2016 "go live".

So if that's not the case, does that mean we're having an election between a yes vote and the start of negotiations so that the negotiating team have a proper mandate? 

Honest question.


----------



## drdel (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Happy to help. :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Then you should do it right... e.g .."upset that"; "..too late.."; " ...a referendum..."; ".. was to..." going is surplus word; "..Uk should have..." had is surplus word;"...It seems...".


I wonder if Apple will decide to get involve the lawyers on the use of "i"Scotland ?


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 16, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Ok, let's go with this. I realise the white paper is the snp's vision but my understanding, which may well be wrong, is that it will form the basis of the negotiations between Friday and the 2016 "go live".

So if that's not the case, does that mean we're having an election between a yes vote and the start of negotiations so that the negotiating team have a proper mandate? 

Honest question.
		
Click to expand...

As long as an iscot pays.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Ok, let's go with this. I realise the white paper is the snp's vision but my understanding, which may well be wrong, is that it will form the basis of the negotiations between Friday and the 2016 "go live".

So if that's not the case, does that mean we're having an election between a yes vote and the start of negotiations so that the negotiating team have a proper mandate? 

Honest question.
		
Click to expand...

I would imagine no election but a cross party/no party collection of politicians from both Holyrood and Westminster representing the best interests of Scotland.It seems reasonable to me?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I would imagine no election but a cross party/no party collection of politicians from both Holyrood and Westminster representing the best interests of Scotland.It seems reasonable to me?
		
Click to expand...

I refer back to my previous comment, who picks them?! You can't just say it will happen naturally, because politics doesn't work like that. Everyone will have their own opinion.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I refer back to my previous comment, who picks them?! You can't just say it will happen naturally, because politics doesn't work like that. Everyone will have their own opinion.
		
Click to expand...

In theory Yes wins so Yes starts the process, so Salmond/Sturgeon/Hosie/Harvie will invite the others.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...s-a-terrible-mistake-Lord-Barnett-admits.html

So the pledge by DC/EM and the other one is already being put into doubt by back benchers.Which leads to the question at the start: why are they so desperate to keep Scotland in the union?Why in effect reduce spending even more in rUK to keep Scotland in the union?Why do that?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...s-a-terrible-mistake-Lord-Barnett-admits.html

So the pledge by DC/EM and the other one is already being put into doubt by back benchers.Which leads to the question at the start: why are they so desperate to keep Scotland in the union?Why in effect reduce spending even more in rUK to keep Scotland in the union?Why do that?
		
Click to expand...

120 pages in and you're still asking why they don't want to break up a successful union


----------



## CMAC (Sep 16, 2014)

9PM *Tonight* BBC News Channel HD- live debate hosted by Radio 1- featuring the future generation on Scotland- should be good.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 16, 2014)

CMAC said:



			120 pages in and you're still asking why they don't want to break up a successful union

Click to expand...

Yes.I'm yet to be given a good answer.Can you provide one?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I would imagine no election but a cross party/no party collection of politicians from both Holyrood and Westminster representing the best interests of Scotland.It seems reasonable to me?
		
Click to expand...

Exactly, you would imagine. Day 1 post a yes vote and even an independence evangelist like yourself doesn't know what will happen.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Yes.I'm yet to be given a good answer.Can you provide one?
		
Click to expand...

Not to a Yes voter no more than you can give a good reason to the RUK why you want to jump ship.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Yes.I'm yet to be given a good answer.Can you provide one?
		
Click to expand...

yes I can, you will spin it though like the whole YES campaign has done with anything remotely positive.

You do realise we want the same things but you want it in a much more radical and destructive way?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 16, 2014)

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/scottish-i...as-reminds-us-suns-hillsborough-slurs-1465735


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 16, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			In theory Yes wins so Yes starts the process, so Salmond/Sturgeon/Hosie/Harvie will invite the others.
		
Click to expand...

That's understandable, but surely the issue is if Salmand is choosing who to invite, there will clearly be an inherent bias with who he picks!


----------



## One Planer (Sep 16, 2014)

I see Salmond is on Sky News again saying how an independent Scotland will use the pound and no-one can stop them. 

That's not in doubt. 

He still failed to answer the no currency union question. Undead he have the "it's in both out interests'" answer. 

Well dodged sir, well dodged. 

I waiting for someone to press him on that subject, just to see how long he can squirm.


----------



## Yerman (Sep 16, 2014)

Is anyone else concerned at the ever worsening deal for the rest of the UK to bribe the Scots to stay?


----------



## Dodger (Sep 16, 2014)

Isle of Man,Jersey,Guernsey......not us apparently though.

I liked Kevin Bridges Dad......"Have it based in Stirling and call it the Poon....Poon Stirling".:lol:


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 16, 2014)

Yerman said:



			Is anyone else concerned at the ever worsening deal for the rest of the UK to bribe the Scots to stay?
		
Click to expand...

Getting that way.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 16, 2014)

CMAC said:



			You do realise we want the same things but you want it in a much more radical and destructive way?
		
Click to expand...

Thats because the Yes side are not interested in democracy, it's the nationalist/republican way.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 16, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Isle of Man,Jersey,Guernsey......not us apparently though.

I liked Kevin Bridges Dad......"Have it based in Stirling and call it the Poon....Poon Stirling".:lol:
		
Click to expand...

Anyone living in RUK will be welcome to the real thing.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 16, 2014)

Yerman said:



			Is anyone else concerned at the ever worsening deal for the rest of the UK to bribe the Scots to stay?
		
Click to expand...

What has been promised that makes it a worsening deal for rUK? More powers for them doesn't mean things are worse for the rest of us?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 16, 2014)

Salmond is now criticising the Westmister leaders for not having any "Content". You couldn't make this up.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 16, 2014)

Dimbleby finally asks him about difficulty of getting devo powers through parliament....... He doesn't answer.

Dimbleby asks again..... Brown explains Barnett formula.

Dimbleby presses him on unilateral writing of constitution (in the Daily Record)(!). In denial, maintaining it will be fair on everyone.


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 16, 2014)

"O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!
It wad frae mony a blunder free us,
An' foolish notion:
What airs in dress an' gait wad lea'e us,
An' ev'n devotion!"

 I notice Nicola has been tidied up and presented in her new frock.    Was that a wee lousie I spotted in her hair?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 16, 2014)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...gn-every-bit-as-dodgy-as-Iraq-dossier.html?fb


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 17, 2014)

Gareth said:



			I see Salmond is on Sky News again saying how an independent Scotland will use the pound and no-one can stop them. 

That's not in doubt. 

He still failed to answer the no currency union question. Undead he have the "it's in both out interests'" answer. 

Well dodged sir, well dodged. 

I waiting for someone to press him on that subject, just to see how long he can squirm.
		
Click to expand...

You can't press him as he claims "scaremongering" which itself is pure scaremongery!


----------



## One Planer (Sep 17, 2014)

Beezerk said:



			You can't press him as he claims "scaremongering" which itself is pure scaremongery!
		
Click to expand...

Purely my point.

Everyone knows they can use the pound. The currency union is the sticking point that he has offered little to no alternative to.


----------



## delc (Sep 17, 2014)

Three good reasons to vote 'No' tomorrow:
1) Alex Salmond
2) Alex Salmond
3) Alex Salmond

Just another self seeking politician in my view.  :mmm:


----------



## delc (Sep 17, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Purely my point.

Everyone knows they can use the pound. The currency union is the sticking point that he has offered little to no alternative to.
		
Click to expand...

Er! The pound is controlled by UK Treasury and the Bank of ENGLAND. Scotland will not be truly independent if their hands are tied by these institutions. You already have funny bank notes up there issued by Scottish banks, so set up a floating Scottish Pound and a controlling national bank.  I was going to say Bank of Scotland, but that already exists as a dodgy commercial bank.


----------



## patricks148 (Sep 17, 2014)

delc said:



			Three good reasons to vote 'No' tomorrow:
1) Alex Salmond
2) Alex Salmond
3) Alex Salmond

Just another self seeking politician in my view.  :mmm:
		
Click to expand...

only thing is, its not a vote for Big Ek, its a vote on Independence


----------



## Slab (Sep 17, 2014)

delc said:



			Three good reasons to vote 'No' tomorrow:
1) Alex Salmond
2) Alex Salmond
3) Alex Salmond

Just another self seeking politician in my view.  :mmm:
		
Click to expand...

No secret how you'll cast your vote then


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 17, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Dimbleby finally asks him about difficulty of getting devo powers through parliament....... He doesn't answer.

Dimbleby asks again..... Brown explains Barnett formula.

Dimbleby presses him on unilateral writing of constitution (in the Daily Record)(!). In denial, maintaining it will be fair on everyone.
		
Click to expand...

Brown promises Barnett formula will remain and will not change  - that'll play well in England and Wales with Lord Barnett not so enamoured by his formula.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...s-a-terrible-mistake-Lord-Barnett-admits.html


----------



## Sweep (Sep 17, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Purely my point.

Everyone knows they can use the pound. The currency union is the sticking point that he has offered little to no alternative to.
		
Click to expand...

An independent Scotland could continue to use the pound, much like large swathes of Mexico use the US Dollar in preference to their own currency. However, Washington (US, not Tyne and Wear ) does not consider Mexico or any other country when making fiscal decisions (interest rates etc) and it could not be expected that London would consider the Scottish sterling black market. It does not take a genius to realise that this would not be good for Scotland. It won't be an attractive proposition for companies to invest or base themselves in a Scotland who's sole currency is controlled by a foreign nation.
I will just repeat a couple of points I have made before:
How could Scotland call itself independent if it's currency and therefore a huge part of its economy is controlled by a foreign nation?
It is right and proper that the UK denies Scotland currency union. An independent Scotland would have rejected a union. If the last 6 years have taught us anything at all in economic terms, it is that currency union does not work without political union. It would be wrong for the UK government to take us down the road to disaster we so luckily managed to just avoid last time with the Euro.


----------



## Sweep (Sep 17, 2014)

If I was a Scottish voter, I would be asking Mr. Salmond this:-
Why would an independent Scotland have to depend on using the pound? Many smaller nations have their own currency (the Channel Islands for example) Why can't Scotland do the same and why have you not planned for it?
I doubt I would receive a concise answer, but I would suspect the real reason would expose a whole raft of holes in the SNP economic policy and in economic terms, blow the whole case for independence out of the water. I suspect in truth an independent Scotland would economically need to cling on to the skirts of the UK - or hide beneath them.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Oil, the burden we can do without-

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=870348219643191


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

iscot wants Independence but also insits its has

Membership of EU without joining the Euro - a requirement of entry
The UK Pound - without having to sign up to any of its economic policies
Membership to NATO - without providing facilities to NATO's most potent weapons system

You insist on nothing, if the member states and the UK agree, you may get some of it, you may even get all of it.  The decision is not iscotlands.


----------



## Slab (Sep 17, 2014)

Sweep said:



			An independent Scotland could continue to use the pound, much like large swathes of Mexico use the US Dollar in preference to their own currency. However, Washington (US, not Tyne and Wear ) does not consider Mexico or any other country when making fiscal decisions (interest rates etc) and it could not be expected that London would consider the Scottish sterling black market. It does not take a genius to realise that this would not be good for Scotland. It won't be an attractive proposition for companies to invest or base themselves in a Scotland who's sole currency is controlled by a foreign nation.
I will just repeat a couple of points I have made before:
*How could Scotland call itself independent if it's currency and therefore a huge part of its economy is controlled by a foreign nation?*
It is right and proper that the UK denies Scotland currency union. An independent Scotland would have rejected a union. If the last 6 years have taught us anything at all in economic terms, it is that currency union does not work without political union. It would be wrong for the UK government to take us down the road to disaster we so luckily managed to just avoid last time with the Euro.
		
Click to expand...

Re my bold:

This keeps cropping up!

Independence doesn't mean building walls & getting the oil on to boil! Like some bizarre 'ger orf moi land' interpretation of independence  

Independence means self determination of the decisions and policies, including setting/creating alliances, memberships and partnerships whether that's with a bank, another nation or as part of an international community


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Sweep said:



			Why would an independent Scotland have to depend on using the pound? Many smaller nations have their own currency (the Channel Islands for example) Why can't Scotland do the same and why have you not planned for it?
		
Click to expand...


I think eck might point you to wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jersey#Currency


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I think eck might point you to wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jersey#Currency

Click to expand...

That is becuase UK wishes to choose the Jersey currency.  iscotland has been told that RUK chooses not to join with them. Maybe petty, may be the wrong decision in the end, but thats how it is for now.


----------



## mikee247 (Sep 17, 2014)

delc said:



			Three good reasons to vote 'No' tomorrow:
1) Alex Salmond
2) Alex Salmond
3) Alex Salmond

Just another self seeking politician in my view.  :mmm:
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree :clap:   You must be mad to follow this plonker into what clearly is the unknown. He is far from impressive, chrasmatic or even slightly credible. I don't understand why or what this fine nation of people see in this fat rather poisoned excuse of a man? Ive worked and fought with some fine jocks (Scots Guards, Black Watch, Southern Highlanders etc etc ) in the past and surely they know better than to follow some gimic of a man over a cliff?!!   You would say good bye to all that loyal military history as well! There is a massive connection up there and I hope they see sense and tick the no box.

 As a rather intelligent, clued up and pragmatic Scottish lady put it on the radio yesterday " People seem to think that jumping onto Salmond's merry band wagon is good for their future but the trouble is.... he has no idea where its going!!??" 

Think very carefully Scotland before voting yes just to pish Cameron and the Tories off... They will have been and gone before you know it.... but you'd be giving up on a Union that's been around for centuries and there's no going back!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			That is becuase UK wishes to choose the Jersey currency.  iscotland has been told that RUK chooses not to join with them. Maybe petty, may be the wrong decision in the end, but thats how it is for now.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed, for now.

So no currency union if we vote yes but devo max of we vote no. The contradictions of love/hate coming from BT is astonishing.


----------



## Stuey01 (Sep 17, 2014)

If there is a yes vote, will Scots who want no part of it be able to move to UK and get/retain UK citizenship?


----------



## Slab (Sep 17, 2014)

mikee247 said:



			Totally agree :clap:   You must be mad to follow this plonker into what clearly is the unknown. He is far from impressive, chrasmatic or even slightly credible. I don't understand why or what this fine nation of people see in this fat rather poisoned excuse of a man? Ive worked and fought with some fine jocks (Scots Guards, Black Watch, Southern Highlanders etc etc ) in the past and surely they know better than to follow some gimic of a man over a cliff?!!   You would say good bye to all that loyal military history as well! There is a massive connection up there and I hope they see sense and tick the no box.

 As a rather intelligent, clued up and pragmatic Scottish lady put it on the radio yesterday " People seem to think that jumping onto Salmond's merry band wagon is good for their future but the trouble is.... he has no idea where its going!!??" 

*Think very carefully Scotland before voting yes just to pish Cameron and the Tories off... They will have been and gone before you know it.... *but you'd be giving up on a Union that's been around for centuries and there's no going back!
		
Click to expand...

So Cameron and the tories gone soon enough but you suggest Salmond is immortal! 

I think you overestimate his powers 

Also, not sure how you say goodbye to military history either. Regardless of the vote the history still happened!


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 17, 2014)

Slab said:



			Independence means self determination of the decisions and policies, including setting/creating alliances, memberships and partnerships whether that's with a bank, another nation or as part of an international community
		
Click to expand...

  For you maybe but in a nutshell these are just a few of the reasons I've been given recently for people voting Yes, obviously I'm paraphrasing slightly...  We have the oil which will make us all rich. We will get a fairer society so the poorer will get richer, rich get poorer. I hate the English. I hate Westiminster. Some English toff on tv was slagging off my home town saying it is a meaningless little hole. More jobs will be created in Scotland. The standard of living will rise for everyone. I hate the Tory toffs...  Sounds like perfectly reasonable thinking to me lol. These are from your average low wage worker in the factories around Scotland who I imagine make up a high percentage of voters.  Gawd help you all.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 17, 2014)

I hope all you YES campaigners are proud of yourselves... https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/bae-indicate-shipyard-closure-event-scottish-yes-vote/ 

theres still time to waken up from your unicorn and fairy story


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 17, 2014)

I'd also like to add, the slagging off of the 3 main leaders visiting Scotland recently shows just how stubborn and blinkered the Yes campaigners are. "Too little too late" is all I'm hearing despite being given the olive branch and potentially more powers to control Scotland. They sound more like a rabble rousing Union leaders who takes the workers out on strike the more I listen to them.


----------



## Slab (Sep 17, 2014)

Beezerk said:



			For you maybe but in a nutshell these are just a few of the reasons I've been given recently for people voting Yes, obviously I'm paraphrasing slightly...  We have the oil which will make us all rich. We will get a fairer society so the poorer will get richer, rich get poorer. I hate the English. I hate Westiminster. Some English toff on tv was slagging off my home town saying it is a meaningless little hole. More jobs will be created in Scotland. The standard of living will rise for everyone. I hate the Tory toffs...  Sounds like perfectly reasonable thinking to me lol. These are from your average low wage worker in the factories around Scotland who I imagine make up a high percentage of voters.  Gawd help you all.
		
Click to expand...

Yup, both sides have their own Kermits & Gonzos 

My point though was to dispel the myth that being independent somehow means work with no one, talk to no one, pull in the drawbridge, we have to be self-sufficient now... as indicated by phrases like _How can you be independent if you still want xyz_


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Slab said:



			as indicated by phrases like _How can you be independent if you still want xyz_

Click to expand...

Because the things you want aren't just normal things any country can expect. You're wanting to cherry pick on the ideal bits for you, and expect rUK to fall in to line and give you what you want.



Slab said:



			So Cameron and the tories gone soon enough but you suggest Salmond is immortal!
		
Click to expand...

Salmond isn't immortal, but if people follow him blindly into independence, that is (for the foreseeable anyway). 



Adi2Dassler said:



			Indeed, for now.

So no currency union if we vote yes but devo max of we vote no. The contradictions of love/hate coming from BT is astonishing.
		
Click to expand...

Pretty much your standard carrot and stick. Would be silly to promise them good things if they vote YES, and bad things if they vote NO. 

Again though, stop focusing on BT, and start telling us actually about what YES means, and how it will resolve all of the issues that are being ignored. How will it cope without a CU? What to do about the Businesses leaving? All the things that have been brought up, and the YES vote has focused on the form, not the substance.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I hope all you YES campaigners are proud of yourselves... https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/bae-indicate-shipyard-closure-event-scottish-yes-vote/ 

theres still time to waken up from your unicorn and fairy story
		
Click to expand...


That's from May? It's been established that both the type 26 ships and Prince of Wale swill be built in Scotland, irrespective of tomorrows vote.They can't be built anywhere else in The UK.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Indeed, for now.

So no currency union if we vote yes but devo max of we vote no. The contradictions of love/hate coming from BT is astonishing.
		
Click to expand...

So you saying NO plus Devo-max brings 'chaos' for England, Wales and NI; YES plus CU is hardly going to be worse for England, Wales and NI.

Yet Westminster say Devo-max is NO problem; CU is YES problem


----------



## mikee247 (Sep 17, 2014)

Slab said:



			So Cameron and the tories gone soon enough but you suggest Salmond is immortal! 

I think you overestimate his powers 

Also, not sure how you say goodbye to military history either. Regardless of the vote the history still happened!
		
Click to expand...

Unbelievably he thinks he's immortal but he'll soon be dead or at the very least proved pointless if he looses tomorrow. 

I agree its in the past and done but its a fine history made mostly from being part of a group of nations that have defended and protected others and these fine Islands together. You'd be giving that all up....for ever and I mean completely because Regiments will be disbanded and that history will be forgotten and lost, people will loose jobs, a lot of them and there will be no money for a decent defence so some dads army set up will happen...... Good enough for NATO??  Not to mention the economic disaster elsewhere when you cant agree on a currency or get into Europe, so export and import issues arise and when all the prices go up in the shops and the big company's move out and then there the issue of oil boundary's comes in and you realise that the massive issue of benefits cant be sustained....and lets not mention healthcare... it goes on and on.   All this just to spite politicians prove a point and think that Salmond is going to be your saviour!! Id be all for it if he had an ounce of credibility and actually a plan for all this but he doesn't. You cant ignore this as its a fact! Well not one the average man on the street is going to see. The new Scottish messiah!! Oh please, Id rather see Rab c Nesbit run the country! Please dont be daft guys....


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Again though, stop focusing on BT, and start telling us actually about what YES means, and how it will resolve all of the issues that are being ignored. How will it cope without a CU? What to do about the Businesses leaving? All the things that have been brought up, and the YES vote has focused on the form, not the substance.
		
Click to expand...

I've honestly done that loads on here, but appreciate things can be lost in the threads I've done it on.

So, no CU. I'm confident it will happen, Carney has been at pains to confirm all the correct economic parameters are in place, only political will.To stress, all the economic parameters required for a CU, according to Mark Carney of the BoE are in place.Only politicians are refusing this, and only they can tell you why.

But OK, no CU.Scotland can either use the Â£ floating,apply to use Euro ( anyone think, given the state of euro, we'd be refused? Me neither.) or set up a new currency. If there is no CU, that removes Scottish consumers from the value of the Â£ (9%) it removes Scottish trade from the balance of payments and as the treasury has already stated, it releases Scotland from it's obligations on national debt (Â£1.7 Trillion!)

We'd find it tough to create a currency from scratch, but given we'd be debt free we'd manage.That's not a threat, it's a fact.The Treasury has taken all responsibility for debt, we'd have none.

If you can tell me of any business that has confirmed it's leaving we'll discuss it.If you refer to RBS moving it's head office-and nothing more- that's already been discounted by the Cheif Exec of RBS.They're staying.Contingencies have to put in place ( by everyone except the govt, apparently) but they're precisely that-contingencies.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			So you saying NO plus Devo-max brings 'chaos' for England, Wales and NI; YES plus CU is hardly going to be worse for England, Wales and NI.

Yet Westminster say Devo-max is NO problem; CU is YES problem
		
Click to expand...

Of course it brings a degree of chaos to rUK.you live in Surrey, yes? Your MP is summoned to Westminster to endorse giving Scotland continuing Barnett payments, increased levels of autonomy and spending and he's expected to vote for that?Who pays?you lot do.Will that MP get reelected if he votes aye? No he doesn't.

I fail to see how a CU affects anyone adversely?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've honestly done that loads on here, but appreciate things can be lost in the threads I've done it on.

So, no CU. I'm confident it will happen, Carney has been at pains to confirm all the correct economic parameters are in place, only political will.To stress, all the economic parameters required for a CU, according to Mark Carney of the BoE are in place.Only politicians are refusing this, and only they can tell you why.

But OK, no CU.Scotland can either use the Â£ floating,apply to use Euro ( anyone think, given the state of euro, we'd be refused? Me neither.) or set up a new currency. If there is no CU, that removes Scottish consumers from the value of the Â£ (9%) it removes Scottish trade from the balance of payments and as the treasury has already stated, it releases Scotland from it's obligations on national debt (Â£1.7 Trillion!)

We'd find it tough to create a currency from scratch, but given we'd be debt free we'd manage.*That's not a threat, it's a fact.The Treasury has taken all responsibility for debt, we'd have none.*

If you can tell me of any business that has confirmed it's leaving we'll discuss it.If you refer to RBS moving it's head office-and nothing more- that's already been discounted by the Cheif Exec of RBS.They're staying.Contingencies have to put in place ( by everyone except the govt, apparently) but they're precisely that-contingencies.
		
Click to expand...

do you seriously seriously believe that? WAKEN UP!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CMAC said:



			do you seriously seriously believe that? WAKEN UP!
		
Click to expand...

Can you show me anything, by anyone in power at the treasury that has said anything contrary to that? 

Sir Nick MacPherson seems to agree with me-




			''Early this year the government made clear that existing debt, erm, is, er, was issued by the United Kingdom and United Kingdom stands behind that debt.â€
		
Click to expand...


----------



## CMAC (Sep 17, 2014)

I'm bowing out of this thread now- I'll watch what happens and read the YES fairy stories and assumptions despite the facts being thrust in their face.

I don't think anyone will change their vote now- bit like exams, if you don't know by now you'll never know.


I just hope the YES 'headbangers', and there are many, dont over react when its a NO on Friday. I have friends in the police and the parliament will be guarded Friday as they 'feel' there could be a backlash from the YES if they dont get their way. I know many are voting for the wrong reasons (demo vote against Westminster, or a 'fairer society' whatever that is)  but I hope they arent stupid enough to resort to civil unrest.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Can you show me anything, by anyone in power at the treasury that has said anything contrary to that? 

Sir Nick MacPherson seems to agree with me-
		
Click to expand...

By the same token then. 

If an iScotland are allowed to walk away from debt created as part of the UK, then an iScotland should also be made to walk away from any assets created within the UK?

Effectively leaving them with not debt, but also no assets. A blank sheet if you will.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I'm bowing out of this thread now- I'll watch what happens and read the YES fairy stories and assumptions despite the facts being thrust in their face.

I don't think anyone will change their vote now- bit like exams, if you don't know by now you'll never know.


I just hope the YES 'headbangers', and there are many, dont over react when its a NO on Friday. I have friends in the police and the parliament will be guarded Friday as they 'feel' there could be a backlash from the YES if they dont get their way. I know many are voting for the wrong reasons (demo vote against Westminster, or a 'fairer society' whatever that is)  but I hope they arent stupid enough to resort to civil unrest.
		
Click to expand...

You seem to have a very low opinion of yes voters, which is a shame as we're just normal Scots like you and other No Thanks voters.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Gareth said:



			By the same token then. 

If an iScotland are allowed to walk away from debt created as part of the UK, then an iScotland should also be made to walk away from any assets created within the UK?

Effectively leaving them with not debt, but also no assets. A blank sheet if you will.
		
Click to expand...

Of Course. No assets, except those we own already....you do accept that we can't give you Stirling Castle or The Forth Rail Bridge or the fish out our seas or the oil out our ground?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

But they would have to buy back all the UK built assets in iScot, ergo they would start in debt.

I can see where you are coming from the the CU Adi, but I think it's too easy to brush off not getting a CU and brush past the risks of that.

Annoyingly, Salmond was repeatedly asked for the risks of an iScot last night and refused to answer



Gareth said:



			By the same token then. 

If an iScotland are allowed to walk away from debt created as part of the UK, then an iScotland should also be made to walk away from any assets created within the UK?

Effectively leaving them with not debt, but also no assets. A blank sheet if you will.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			But they would have to buy back all the UK built assets in iScot, ergo they would start in debt.

I can see where you are coming from the the CU Adi, but I think it's too easy to brush off not getting a CU and brush past the risks of that.

Annoyingly, Salmond was repeatedly asked for the risks of an iScot last night and refused to answer
		
Click to expand...

Buy back UK built assets in iScot? That reopens the notion we'd be entitled to a % of UK built assets in England.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Buy back UK built assets in iScot? That reopens the notion we'd be entitled to a % of UK built assets in England.
		
Click to expand...

No it doesn't?

If you're not having the debt, you don't get the assets. Ergo, the valuers come in, value the assets in Scotland that belong to the UK, and you can buy it off us. 

I don't see how you could argue both that the debt isn't yours, but that the assets are. I understand the debt part, as the treasury agreed that, but the assets that were built with UK money, and you can't keep them for nothing.


----------



## Slab (Sep 17, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Because the things you want aren't just normal things any country can expect. *You're wanting to cherry pick on the ideal bits for you,* and expect rUK to fall in to line and give you what you want....
		
Click to expand...

But surely everyone can see that this is simply a negotiation jump off point (in tandem with the BT 'you're getting naff all' standpoint)

Until the yes/no is decided neither side has/will spell stuff out (mostly because it is unknown until negotiations are underway)

This whole referendum is a giant game of staring out your opponent and with hours to go BT are blinking like mado's (in reality they were daft not to see it coming)

When the dust settles I think we'll end up with a Devo Max 'Lite' outcome, but it must be obvious that any additional powers would never even have been on the table if Yes hadn't cherry picked what they wanted in the first place

Can you imagine:
Salmond: we're gonna have a referendum for independence
Cameron: Ok 
Salmond: if we win we want the Â£, some military, the oil etc etc
Cameron: but you realise there's zero chance of a currency union & there's no much oil left
Salmond: fair enough we wont bother then...
Cameron: cool :whoo:


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			No it doesn't?

If you're not having the debt, you don't get the assets. Ergo, the valuers come in, value the assets in Scotland that belong to the UK, and you can buy it off us. 

I don't see how you could argue both that the debt isn't yours, but that the assets are. I understand the debt part, as the treasury agreed that, but the assets that were built with UK money, and you can't keep them for nothing.
		
Click to expand...

Apologies, I'm not following.

So UK built assets in Scotland, can you give me maybe 2 examples?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Apologies, I'm not following.

So UK built assets in Scotland, can you give me maybe 2 examples?
		
Click to expand...

Trident!


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Apologies, I'm not following.

So UK built assets in Scotland, can you give me maybe 2 examples?
		
Click to expand...

Any of the military bases, for a start.

As Holyrood was paid for by UK money, you can buy that back off us.

The Edinburgh trams.

There is a hell of a lot paid for by UK money, whether or not it came from Westminster or Holyrood. It was all from the same, big pot. Ergo, if iScot wants them, why wouldn't they have to pay for them? The creation of these assets is part of the debt that they're leaving behind.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Any of the military bases, for a start.

As Holyrood was paid for by UK money, you can buy that back off us.

The Edinburgh trams.

There is a hell of a lot paid for by UK money, whether or not it came from Westminster or Holyrood. It was all from the same, big pot. Ergo, if iScot wants them, why wouldn't they have to pay for them? The creation of these assets is part of the debt that they're leaving behind.
		
Click to expand...

An interesting interpretation.So to clarify, you are of the opinion that Holyrood,Edinburgh trams, any military base and effectively anything built by the public sector is the property of The UK.Do you think that hospitals, police uniforms and fire engines are also property of The UK?

And consider that everyone in Scotland has also contributed financially to the UK pot.Isn't it logical that we've funded these things ourselves?Or do you still think they all belong to The UK?


----------



## Stuey01 (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			An interesting interpretation.So to clarify, you are of the opinion that Holyrood,Edinburgh trams, any military base and effectively anything built by the public sector is the property of The UK.Do you think that hospitals, police uniforms and fire engines are also property of The UK?

And consider that everyone in Scotland has also contributed financially to the UK pot.Isn't it logical that we've funded these things ourselves?Or do you still think they all belong to The UK?
		
Click to expand...

They belong the whole of the UK, as they were funded out of the big pot. As does the debt. Scotland has contributed to the whole of the UK so it should get its share of the assets, but also the debt. Taking one without the other is what is illogical.


Edited for typos, stupid phone autocorrect...


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Stuey01 said:



			They belong the hole of the UK, as they were funding out of the big pot. As does the debt. Scotland has contributed to the whole of the UK so it should get its share of the assets, but also the debt. Taking one without the other is what is illogical.
		
Click to expand...

Is the Â£ an asset?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			An interesting interpretation.So to clarify, you are of the opinion that Holyrood,Edinburgh trams, any military base and effectively anything built by the public sector is the property of The UK.Do you think that hospitals, police uniforms and fire engines are also property of The UK?

And consider that everyone in Scotland has also contributed financially to the UK pot.Isn't it logical that we've funded these things ourselves?Or do you still think they all belong to The UK?
		
Click to expand...

Of course you funded them yourselves, as part of UK. But you're leaving the debt remember. 

I see that it's an interesting interpretation, but I think it's more logical than assuming you get all of the assets and none of the debt?

And yes, I think all of those things are property of the UK. Clearly, in my opinion, there should be a figure of Â£XXX to "buy" them off us. 

Considering iScot is proclaiming itself as a more fair, just, equal (etc) society, I don't see how this could be argued with.

Clearly the fairest thing to do would be to take the share of the debt, and keep the assets in the country. Oh, and start a new currency.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Is the Â£ an asset?
		
Click to expand...

The Â£ is money, which is a mechanism 

I see where you're going with this, but I can't see how you can divide up an asset such as the Â£. It's the mechanism behind everything, and you either control it, or you don't....

The asset/liability side of the Â£ is the debt.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Of course you funded them yourselves, as part of UK. But you're leaving the debt remember. 

I see that it's an interesting interpretation, but I think it's more logical than assuming you get all of the assets and none of the debt?

And yes, I think all of those things are property of the UK. Clearly, in my opinion, there should be a figure of Â£XXX to "buy" them off us. 

Considering iScot is proclaiming itself as a more fair, just, equal (etc) society, I don't see how this could be argued with.

Clearly the fairest thing to do would be to take the share of the debt, and keep the assets in the country. Oh, and start a new currency.
		
Click to expand...

So how much debt should we take?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Of course it brings a degree of chaos to rUK.you live in Surrey, yes? Your MP is summoned to Westminster to endorse giving Scotland continuing Barnett payments, increased levels of autonomy and spending and he's expected to vote for that?Who pays?you lot do.Will that MP get reelected if he votes aye? No he doesn't.

I fail to see how a CU affects anyone adversely?
		
Click to expand...

It does appear that in promising these 'new powers' for a NO - Westminster have made a rod for their own back that could be a lot more painful - and painful to sell to the UK electorate outside Scotland - than CU would be.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So how much debt should we take?
		
Click to expand...

However much we can get away with giving you 

There will be all sorts of different ways to look at this. Population being just one of them.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			It does appear that in promising these 'new powers' for a NO - Westminster have made a rod for their own back that could be a lot more painful - and painful to sell to the UK electorate outside Scotland - than CU would be.
		
Click to expand...

I think it's a perfect opportunity actually. They can use this to take a look at the whole political structure in the UK and change it to dit the modern world better!


----------



## ger147 (Sep 17, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			The Â£ is money, which is a mechanism 

I see where you're going with this, but I can't see how you can divide up an asset such as the Â£. It's the mechanism behind everything, and you either control it, or you don't....

The asset/liability side of the Â£ is the debt.
		
Click to expand...

The reserves of the UK's central bank are a UK asset so Scotland should get a share of those if we're going down the road of sharing everything out fairly.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			However much we can get away with giving you 

There will be all sorts of different ways to look at this. Population being just one of them.
		
Click to expand...

Ha!

So use population, 9%. Do we get 9% of all the assets? 

https://twitter.com/AssetScotland


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Ha!

So use population, 9%. Do we get 9% of all the assets? 

https://twitter.com/AssetScotland

Click to expand...

We work out what the assets in iScot are worth first. Then I imagine there would be a balancing figure.

If you want 9% of the assets in the UK, then we are owed 91% of the assets in iScot.

You can't have everything in iScot, and then 9% of the rest of the UK as well.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

ger147 said:



			The reserves of the UK's central bank are a UK asset so Scotland should get a share of those if we're going down the road of sharing everything out fairly.
		
Click to expand...

Can't argue with that logic.


See how much hassle all of this is? may as well just stay part ofthe union, much easier


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			We work out what the assets in iScot are worth first. Then I imagine there would be a balancing figure.

If you want 9% of the assets in the UK, then we are owed 91% of the assets in iScot.

You can't have everything in iScot, and then 9% of the rest of the UK as well.
		
Click to expand...

Reasonable. Are you including fish/oil/waves/wind and water in your assets of Scotland? This could be a wee bit complicated!


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Reasonable. Are you including fish/oil/waves/wind and water in your assets of Scotland? This could be a wee bit complicated!
		
Click to expand...

As an accountant, I will certainly try and value them, but it could cost you a hell of a lot  (but it's fine, tell me what you want the answer to be, and I will get that for you!)

I do see what you mean though about how complicated it could get, it's just one of the many reasons I don't think a YES would work. Salmond keeps going on about how we would be best mates, ideal neighbours etc etc, but in these sort of negotiations, one or both parties ALWAYS ends up feeling hard done by, which doesn't exactly lead to idea relationships.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 17, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Can't argue with that logic.


See how much hassle all of this is? may as well just stay part ofthe union, much easier 

Click to expand...

It's only a hassle because our system unfortunately means politicians get to sort it out. I reckon ordinary folk could sort it out over a long weekend in Berwick Upon Tweed.


----------



## Imurg (Sep 17, 2014)

Anyone else starting to think that this is going to be more complicated than first thought.?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 17, 2014)

Imurg said:



			Anyone else starting to think that this is going to be more complicated than first thought.?
		
Click to expand...

Whatever happens it's going to be really complicated.  Was always was going to be complicated and messy if YES, but also fallout from a NO will be much messier than originally thought now that Gordie and the W3 have lobbed serious Home Rule into the pot - and that's going to be difficult to deliver if noises off (from Westminster) are to be believed.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Imurg said:



			Anyone else starting to think that this is going to be more complicated than first thought.?
		
Click to expand...

I think it could be _very_ complicated if that's the road the politicians want to take it down.Hoping common sense prevails if yes wins


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Indeed, for now.

So no currency union if we vote yes but devo max of we vote no. The contradictions of love/hate coming from BT is astonishing.
		
Click to expand...

The contradiction is coming from politician, not the RUK. The RUK want you to stay but the devo max issue will cause considerable debate amongst the everyday people in the RUK. The Scots should vote No only if they truly wish to remain and not because they want Independence in another name.

Like most Welsh folk, until this little hand grenade was pitched into the fray, I and most of my connections were more patriotic towards the UK and in the past voted overwhemelmingly against Independence. Trying to bribe Scots is not the way forward nor is the argument that social justice and the land will be full of milk and honey suggested by the Yes campaign the answere.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I think it could be _very_ complicated if that's the road the politicians want to take it down.Hoping common sense prevails if yes wins
		
Click to expand...

If yes wins common sense has already departed.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			If yes wins common sense has already departed.
		
Click to expand...

Have a like. GM really must change its forum software


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 17, 2014)

I've not really given too much thought to the building of a Scottish infrastructure, post-Yes. But think of all the govt. depts that would need to be paid for, e.g. Scottish DVLA and on and on and on. Some of those 'offices' already exist but do they exist in the size reqd? So, does Scotland pay 'x' for services from rUK? And how many services are based in Scotland? Is it a motorway of money heading south, and a B road heading north?

And no, I'm not trying to scaremonger.

Does that mean Scotland would be paying for 'aquiring' Faslane? The enormity of it all is just mind blowing.


----------



## mikee247 (Sep 17, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I'm bowing out of this thread now- I'll watch what happens and read the YES fairy stories and assumptions despite the facts being thrust in their face.

I don't think anyone will change their vote now- bit like exams, if you don't know by now you'll never know.


I just hope the YES 'headbangers', and there are many, dont over react when its a NO on Friday. I have friends in the police and the parliament will be guarded Friday as they 'feel' there could be a backlash from the YES if they dont get their way. I know many are voting for the wrong reasons (demo vote against Westminster, or a 'fairer society' whatever that is)  but I hope they aren't stupid enough to resort to civil unrest.
		
Click to expand...


yes I agree there are numerous accounts of over intimidation already from the Yes camp and it was even apparent on the news last night. A lot of no voters are staying quiet for obvious reasons. Its all going to kick off if it doesn't go there way.

The simple facts are unclear there is so much that is undecided, unconfirmed and pure speculation that how can people possibly have enough factual information to base a logical thought out decision on. Doing that risks and effects their whole families lives and futures. It madness to even think of voting yes for that one reason alone.   Emotional decisions of this magnitude are ill advised.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			If yes wins common sense has already departed.
		
Click to expand...

If yes wins the majority of Scotland disagrees with that assertion


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If yes wins the majority of Scotland disagrees with that assertion
		
Click to expand...

Which wouldn't make it any less correct.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

mikee247 said:



			yes I agree there are numerous accounts of over intimidation already from the Yes camp and it was even apparent on the news last night. A lot of no voters are staying quiet for obvious reasons. Its all going to kick off if it doesn't go there way.

The simple facts are unclear there is so much that is undecided, unconfirmed and pure speculation that how can people possibly have enough factual information to base a logical thought out decision on. Doing that risks and effects their whole families lives and futures. It madness to even think of voting yes for that one reason alone.  * Emotional decisions of this magnitude are ill advised.*

Click to expand...

and yet it's OK to suggest anarchy if No wins? Rightyho.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Which wouldn't make it any less correct.
		
Click to expand...

In your opinion, which won't be the majority view displayed in a democratic referendum.You'll have to concede you might be wrong, just as I will if I lose.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If yes wins the majority of Scotland disagrees with that assertion
		
Click to expand...

You raise a god point there Adi'.

With this being a straight vote with the highest majority winning, it could potentially end up being a YES by 51% to 49% or vice versa.

How does an iScotland reconcile that gap when 49% of the populous, or just over 2 million people, don't want what they are being forced into?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Gareth said:



			You raise a god point there Adi'.

With this being a straight vote with the highest majority winning, it could potentially end up being a YES by 51% to 49%.

How does an iScotland reconcile that gap when 49% of the populous, or just over 2 million people, don't want what they are being forced into?
		
Click to expand...

50% + 1 vote! The majority will accept the democratic process, there will be a minority with either result that will shout loud and long.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			In your opinion, which won't be the majority view displayed in a democratic referendum.You'll have to concede you might be wrong, just as I will if I lose.
		
Click to expand...

I've done many things in my life knowing it wasn't the common sense decision. So, I'm afraid no matter how many vote for independence I'll always consider it to not be common sense.

Other than that you are correct, if the majority vote for it I will have no choice than to get on with it. Unfortunately, I don't think many of your side will be so sanguine after a "no" vote.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			50% + 1 vote! The majority will accept the democratic process, there will be a minority with either result that will shout loud and long.
		
Click to expand...

That didn't answer my question though.

Which ever side comes out on top of the pole still leaves a high percentage of Scotland population dis-satisfied.

With how the fires have been stoked in the last few days, I find it hard to believe that any YES/NO voters from the 'losing' side will just say:

"Oh well, that's OK, so long as it's what most of the people want"

And letting it lie.

Would you? Would you be in the same mind as the quote above, or would you still feel that a mistake had been made and/or opportunity missed. Could you let it go that easily?

I find it quite difficult to believe that over 2 million people will _just accept_ the decision and change their minds.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi I dearly hope you have been on the streets campaigning.

You are a credit to the YESers.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Adi I dearly hope you have been on the streets campaigning.

You are a credit to the YESers.
		
Click to expand...

Folk might find this hard to believe, but this forum aside, I rarely discuss it!


----------



## mikee247 (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			and yet it's OK to suggest anarchy if No wins? Rightyho.
		
Click to expand...

??? I'm not suggesting anything Its a fact that intimidation has and is already taking place and could possibly get worse if they dont get their way.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Folk might find this hard to believe, but this forum aside, I rarely discuss it!
		
Click to expand...

Snap, it appears folk outside my circle of friends and acquaintances appear to want to discuss it more.


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 17, 2014)

Gareth said:



			That didn't answer my question though.

Which ever side comes out on top of the pole still leaves a high percentage of Scotland population dis-satisfied.

With how the fires have been stoked in the last few days, I find it hard to believe that any YES/NO voters from the 'losing' side will just say:

"Oh well, that's OK, so long as it's what most of the people want"

And letting it lie.

Would you? Would you be in the same mind as the quote above, or would you still feel that a mistake had been made and/or opportunity missed. Could you let it go that easily?

I find it quite difficult to believe that over 2 million people will _just accept_ the decision and change their minds.
		
Click to expand...

Hmm a hell of a lot of miffed Scots either way, it's going to be messy I reckon...I can't wait  
I wonder what the ripple effect will be in the UK if it's a Yes? Cameron will lose all credibility I imagine, he'll go down in history as the PM who let the Scots out of the Union while he sat on a beach in *insert hot country*


----------



## Wabinez (Sep 17, 2014)

Without wanting to sound disrespectful to anyone...but is anyone else getting fed up of the scenario now?  It's littering the TV's, and the same things are said over and over and over again.  I realise it is a fairly large issue (and ultimately, i'm not really fussed either way...however, I can see it ending badly if it is a Yes vote).

I, for one, will be glad once the vote has come and gone...however, I am sure there will be plenty of fallout


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			50% + 1 vote! The majority will accept the democratic process, there will be a minority with either result that will shout loud and long.
		
Click to expand...

Why would they accept the democratic process. This whole thing kicked off because a minority of nationalist didn't accept the democratic process.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

IMHO this will kick off big style in certain areas of Scotland no matter which way the vote goes. The SNP knew what they were up to and whatever the outcome they knew they will have effectively split Scotland. Bunch of very dangerous nationalist have led the Scots into a heap of crap.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Why would they accept the democratic process. This whole thing kicked off because a minority of nationalist didn't accept the democratic process.
		
Click to expand...

What, like the democratic process of electing The SNP to carry out one of their manifesto policies of having a democratic referendum?

Stop being a daftie


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

http://www.spf.org.uk/2014/09/spf-media-release-independence-referendum-2/


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 17, 2014)

I think could be pretty big margin in the end (10%+) - and could be either way.

If I had vote I would be soft YES.  But I can easy see myself standing in booth - pausing - and putting my cross against NO.  And I think there might be a lot of soft YES like that.  So 10% gap NO

Other side is that the pollsters haven't a clue about how many 'new voters' (not referring to 16/17 yr olds) will actually vote and similarly no idea of what they will vote as polls may not be picking up their intentions at all.   Thinking seems to be that if they bother to vote having now registered, then a big majority would go YES. So 10% gap YES.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			What, like the democratic process of electing The SNP to carry out one of their manifesto policies of having a democratic referendum?

Stop being a daftie
		
Click to expand...

All the way through this thread Yes voters have openly stated that they want independence because they not likie the Tories. So it's pretty obvious that you have no respect for the democrats process and cannot accept that under it you lose some and you win some. You don't run off with the ball like some spoilt brat halfway through the game.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I think could be pretty big margin in the end (10%+) - and could be either way.

If I had vote I would be soft YES.  But I can easy see myself standing in booth - pausing - and putting my cross against NO.  And I think there might be a lot of soft YES like that.  So 10% gap NO

Other side is that the pollsters haven't a clue about how many 'new voters' (not referring to 16/17 yr olds) will actually vote and similarly no idea of what they will vote as polls may not be picking up their intentions at all.   Thinking seems to be that if they bother to vote having now registered, then a big majority would go YES. So 10% gap YES.
		
Click to expand...

You must have some big splinters in your rear end at the moment!


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.spf.org.uk/2014/09/spf-media-release-independence-referendum-2/

Click to expand...

Let's hope he's right. A lot of heartache and experience leads me to believe otherwise.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			All the way through this thread Yes voters have openly stated that they want independence because they not likie the Tories. So it's pretty obvious that you have no respect for the democrats process and cannot accept that under it you lose some and you win some. You don't run off with the ball like some spoilt brat halfway through the game.
		
Click to expand...

I don't recall YES voters stating it like that?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			All the way through this thread Yes voters have openly stated that they want independence because they not likie the Tories. So it's pretty obvious that you have no respect for the democrats process and cannot accept that under it you lose some and you win some. You don't run off with the ball like some spoilt brat halfway through the game.
		
Click to expand...

You really have no clue about what's going on


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I think could be pretty big margin in the end (10%+) - and could be either way.

If I had vote I would be soft YES.  But I can easy see myself standing in booth - pausing - and putting my cross against NO.  And I think there might be a lot of soft YES like that.  So 10% gap NO

Other side is that the pollsters haven't a clue about how many 'new voters' (not referring to 16/17 yr olds) will actually vote and similarly no idea of what they will vote as polls may not be picking up their intentions at all.   Thinking seems to be that if they bother to vote having now registered, then a big majority would go YES. So 10% gap YES.
		
Click to expand...

Bloody hell flip flop, make a decision for once in your life. Are you a civil servant by any chance.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			You really have no clue about what's going on
		
Click to expand...

About as much as you I suspect.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			About as much as you I suspect.
		
Click to expand...


I'll leave others to decide how in tune I am with this debate


----------



## CMAC (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'll leave others to decide how in tune I am with this debate
		
Click to expand...

you might be in tune in your head, but you are also tone deaf :ears:


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'll leave others to decide how in tune I am with this debate
		
Click to expand...

Now I understand. I don't agree with your assumptions therefore my points are not valid. You are Salmond and I claim my 10 scrotes.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CMAC said:



			you might be in tune in your head, but you are also tone deaf :ears:
		
Click to expand...

I've listened to the debate and answered, I've been scoffed at and kept coming back.I'm confident in my assertions and my point of view and can back it up, unlike most on here.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've listened to the debate and answered, I've been scoffed at and kept coming back.I'm confident in my assertions and my point of view and can back it up, unlike most on here.
		
Click to expand...

Very true.

You presented the YES portion of the debate very well. 

The NO vote too has merits and, personally, I believe the NO carries more clout than the YES, simply because of the lack of guarantees, post YES, by YES.

I, fortunately, don't get a vote, but I will be waiting on the outcome for sure.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've listened to the debate and answered, I've been scoffed at and kept coming back.I'm confident in my assertions and my point of view and can back it up, unlike most on here.
		
Click to expand...

Agreed, think you've done very well to remain calm at times. It's been really interesting hearing your point of view (even if you are wrong  ), and you've certainly made me rethink my opinion a few times.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've listened to the debate and answered, I've been scoffed at and kept coming back.I'm confident in my assertions and my point of view and can back it up, unlike most on here.
		
Click to expand...

I think that is fair comment. Your position is quite rational, well thought through and plausible (if slightly over optimistic in places).

I don't agree with you but can respect where you're coming from.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've listened to the debate and answered, I've been scoffed at and kept coming back.I'm confident in my assertions and my point of view and can back it up, *unlike most on here*.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think that's very fair. Yes you have argued a good case but built on assumption and faith and sometimes in direct opposition to the spoken and written facts.

_Most_ on here have portrayed equally good arguments and asked questions that have been deflected or ignored by the YES campaign.


I've said it before and I'll say it again. YES and NO want the same things but YES are going about it in a radical and ultimately destructive way in my view, fuelled by the SNP's entire reason for being. - separation.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Bloody hell flip flop, make a decision for once in your life. Are you a civil servant by any chance.
		
Click to expand...

I have explained why I would find myself soft-YES and voting NO.  And it isn't flip flopping.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 17, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Now I understand. I don't agree with your assumptions therefore my points are not valid. You are Salmond and I claim my 10 scrotes.
		
Click to expand...

Ah but Wee Eck (he's on the 5:2 diet and has lost 3st did you know ) doesn't play g...

Scratch golfer I believe - or so he told me once


----------



## Paperboy (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			That's from May? It's been established that both the type 26 ships and Prince of Wale swill be built in Scotland, irrespective of tomorrows vote.They can't be built anywhere else in The UK.
		
Click to expand...

Only the carriers can't be built anywhere else. The type 26's where offered as a bribe in essence. The british government won't allow miltary equipment to be built outside the UK. 

The Type 26's can be made in Portsmouth as far as I'm aware.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Paperboy said:



			Only the carriers can't be built anywhere else. The type 26's where offered as a bribe in essence. The british government won't allow miltary equipment to be built outside the UK. 

The Type 26's can be made in Portsmouth as far as I'm aware.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-28835583

The type 26ers are being built in Scotland, yes or no victory.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-28835583

Click to expand...

Surely no the bias BBC :smirk:


----------



## Paperboy (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-28835583

The type 26ers are being built in Scotland, yes or no victory.
		
Click to expand...

Well I work for BAE Systems, and there are preparing announcements dependant on the vote. Sure the BBC know everything


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-28835583

The type 26ers are being built in Scotland, yes or no victory.
		
Click to expand...

You may be correct in your assumption but Portsmouth has not yet closed down completely and could gear up if required.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'll leave others to decide how in tune I am with this debate
		
Click to expand...


Adi, this fella is hugely out of touch of what is occurring, he is not the only one mind you.

Not worth biting on the line he's casting.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

Paperboy said:



			Well I work for BAE Systems, and there are preparing announcements dependant on the vote. Sure the BBC know everything 

Click to expand...

I just googled it...

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/bu...systems-shipyard-site-in-portsmouth-1-6207753

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...-shipyard-to-close-as-BAE-cuts-1775-jobs.html


----------



## evahakool (Sep 17, 2014)

As a fisherman I think if Scotland gets independence it would be a terrible situation for the fishing industry,the snp have not come out and said what the future plans would be,what little they have said is only based on assumptions, this for me is the flawed argument of the snp most of their policy's seem to me to be based on the premise of let's get independence and then try and govern.

IMO this is no way to plan for the future of Scotland


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

evahakool said:



			As a fisherman I think if Scotland gets independence it would be a terrible situation for the fishing industry,the snp have not come out and said what the future plans would be,what little they have said is only based on assumptions, this for me is the flawed argument of the snp most of their policy's seem to me to be based on the premise of let's get independence and then try and govern.

IMO this is no way to plan for the future of Scotland
		
Click to expand...

One of last nights TV highlights was two lobster fishermen from dunbar on CH4 news.They basically ripped the pish out of each other, one was yes, one was no.

But I'm interested in your point of view seeing as you work in one of our main industries.My own, possibly misguided, view of fishing the north sea, is the common fisheries policy we signed up to has reduced your ability? Wasn't it a rough deal handed down by westminster? I'd have thought independence would be great for your industry?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 17, 2014)

Maybe heres why the 1st minister doesnt put an end to the bully boy YES tactics http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...iversity-head-over-independence-concerns.html


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 17, 2014)

Not sure I agree with, or even follow the logic of this article, however perhaps something for yes-voting celtic fans to consider.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/...ottish-independence-would-kill-celtic-4275483


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Not sure I agree with, or even follow the logic of this article, however perhaps something for yes-voting celtic fans to consider.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/...ottish-independence-would-kill-celtic-4275483

Click to expand...

I'm now firmly in the no camp.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'm now firmly in the no camp.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, I reckon that should win the day!


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			One of last nights TV highlights was two lobster fishermen from dunbar on CH4 news.They basically ripped the pish out of each other, one was yes, one was no.

But I'm interested in your point of view seeing as you work in one of our main industries.My own, possibly misguided, view of fishing the north sea, is the common fisheries policy we signed up to has reduced your ability? Wasn't it a rough deal handed down by westminster? I'd have thought independence would be great for your industry?
		
Click to expand...

I always thjought the fisheries act was European wide, and therefore couldn't be a rough deal from Westminster?? More likely to be a rough deal from your wannabe new bosses in Brussels!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 17, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I always thjought the fisheries act was European wide, and therefore couldn't be a rough deal from Westminster?? More likely to be a rough deal from your wannabe new bosses in Brussels!
		
Click to expand...

It's european, singed up by westminster and arent there major problems with discagrding perfectly good fish within it?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It's european, singed up by westminster and arent there major problems with discagrding perfectly good fish within it?
		
Click to expand...

I agree that it's a hell of a rough deal, and there is loads wrong with it, but as part of the EU, I fail to see how an iScot wouldn't have signed up to it?


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			It's european, singed up by westminster and arent there major problems with discagrding perfectly good fish within it?
		
Click to expand...

To which iscot would have to if they joined the EU, much against your wishes I know, but you can't have everything.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 17, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Not sure I agree with, or even follow the logic of this article, however perhaps something for yes-voting celtic fans to consider.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/...ottish-independence-would-kill-celtic-4275483

Click to expand...

That article - and the DR in general - is aptly described by a Scottish 4-letter word beginning wit 'P' and ending with 'H' - preceded by 'utter'!


----------



## evahakool (Sep 17, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			One of last nights TV highlights was two lobster fishermen from dunbar on CH4 news.They basically ripped the pish out of each other, one was yes, one was no.

But I'm interested in your point of view seeing as you work in one of our main industries.My own, possibly misguided, view of fishing the north sea, is the common fisheries policy we signed up to has reduced your ability? Wasn't it a rough deal handed down by westminster? I'd have thought independence would be great for your industry?
		
Click to expand...

No not really misguided some good points raised, you are correct in saying the Westminster government sold our fisherman out when joining into the common market, and year on year whatever government are in power the fishing industry gets very little support.

The commen fisheries policy is a very complex set of negotiations and you can't really single out areas such as the North Sea for example, the last thing our fishing industry needs is uncertainty and if Scotland gets independence without really knowing what will happen after independence would result IMO disaster for the fishing industry .

So in a ideal world independence would seem a very good idea for our fishing industry ,the reality is very different.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 17, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			That article - and the DR in general - is aptly described by a Scottish 4-letter word beginning wit 'P' and ending with 'H' - preceded by 'utter'!
		
Click to expand...

I think you're being too kind to it.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 17, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I think you're being too kind to it.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl: Perhaps add 'shairn/shearn/sharn' to it as well - and still probably not strong enough!


----------



## Andy808 (Sep 17, 2014)

evahakool said:



			No not really misguided some good points raised, you are correct in saying the Westminster government sold our fisherman out when joining into the common market, and year on year whatever government are in power the fishing industry gets very little support.

The commen fisheries policy is a very complex set of negotiations and you can't really single out areas such as the North Sea for example, the last thing our fishing industry needs is uncertainty and if Scotland gets independence without really knowing what will happen after independence would result IMO disaster for the fishing industry .

So in a ideal world independence would seem a very good idea for our fishing industry ,the reality is very different.
		
Click to expand...


Or you could look at it the other way as in Scotland would no longer be part of the EU with no guarantee of getting in even if they wanted to means the EU has no control over the levels of fishing in Scottish waters. 
Fish it till it's dry if you like no one can stop you but it's the same as the oil, it will run out sooner than everyone thinks. 

No offence but it's all getting boring now with the no campaigners making a valid reason to vote no only for the yes campaigners to turn around and say they are scaremongering. 

I can't believe none of the TV channels are showing Braveheart tonight!


----------



## evahakool (Sep 17, 2014)

Andy808 said:



			Or you could look at it the other way as in Scotland would no longer be part of the EU with no guarantee of getting in even if they wanted to means the EU has no control over the levels of fishing in Scottish waters. 
Fish it till it's dry if you like no one can stop you but it's the same as the oil, it will run out sooner than everyone thinks. 

No offence but it's all getting boring now with the no campaigners making a valid reason to vote no only for the yes campaigners to turn around and say they are scaremongering. 

I can't believe none of the TV channels are showing Braveheart tonight!
		
Click to expand...

Baffling statment saying "fish it till it's dry and it will run out sooner than everyone thinks" the Scottish fleet are under very strict quote restrictions and this would not change a great deal if Scotland gained independence, any Scottish government would never allow a unrestricted quota allowance.


----------



## Andy808 (Sep 17, 2014)

evahakool said:



			Baffling statment saying "fish it till it's dry and it will run out sooner than everyone thinks" the Scottish fleet are under very strict quote restrictions and this would not change a great deal if Scotland gained independence, any Scottish government would never allow a unrestricted quota allowance.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not saying they would only that they could. You would in effect be out of all EU control. 

I'm hoping for a no vote myself as it would be very costly to send the missus back if you vote yes. :thup:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 17, 2014)

To my voting fellow Scots and others having that same privilege tomorrow - best wishes and use your vote well.


----------



## Beezerk (Sep 18, 2014)

One more day until I don't hear the word "scaremongering" for a while...bring it on


----------



## drdel (Sep 18, 2014)

I do find it amusing that those who want to get Scotland away from the UK in order to be independent desperately want to belong to the EU - an organisation essentially formed of a non-elected set of professional politicians whose goal is greater and great control and less national sovereignty.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 18, 2014)

drdel said:



			I do find it amusing that those who want to get Scotland away from the UK in order to be independent desperately want to belong to the EU - an organisation essentially formed of a non-elected set of professional politicians whose goal is greater and great control and less national sovereignty.
		
Click to expand...

Non elected? What are the MEP elections?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 18, 2014)

Excited/Scared/Emotional

We're very lucky to be alive just now.I'm logging off until sometime tomorrow/Saturday, I'll be back to accept I was wrong or to bathe in the warm after glow of smugness*


*only joking a wee bit


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Excited/Scared/Emotional

We're very lucky to be alive just now.I'm logging off until sometime tomorrow/Saturday, I'll be back to accept I was wrong or to bathe in the warm after glow of smugness*


*only joking a wee bit

Click to expand...

I really really really want this all to be over and for you to come out as a secret NO voter, or something else unlikely! That would make me chuckle a lot.

At the end of the day, I'm so impressed at the voter registration numbers in Scotland. How amazing would it be if a general election in teh UK had that turnout.



Also, if Scotland does stay NO, can I start a "European Debate" thread, for the referendum that may/may not happen on that?


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 18, 2014)

There is some swearing in this show occasionally so the may be some in this, I can't remember.  But it is funny.

[video=youtube_share;-YkLPxQp_y0]http://youtu.be/-YkLPxQp_y0[/video]


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 18, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			I really really really want this all to be over and for you to come out as a secret NO voter, or something else unlikely! That would make me chuckle a lot.

At the end of the day, I'm so impressed at the voter registration numbers in Scotland. How amazing would it be if a general election in teh UK had that turnout.



Also, if Scotland does stay NO, can I start a "European Debate" thread, for the referendum that may/may not happen on that?
		
Click to expand...

What has registration levels got to do with the outcome?


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 18, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			What has registration levels got to do with the outcome?
		
Click to expand...

It doesn't??? I was just saying I'm impressed with the levels...... I didn't mention that it would affect the outcome?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 18, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			It doesn't??? I was just saying I'm impressed with the levels...... I didn't mention that it would affect the outcome?
		
Click to expand...

It bodes well but the actual turnout will be more relevant, I think. Plenty of people on the electoral register don't actually vote.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It bodes well but the actual turnout will be more relevant, I think. Plenty of people on the electoral register don't actually vote.
		
Click to expand...

True. You would like to think 90%+ would be achievable, which would be an amazing achievement. Anything under 80% and it opens up all sorts of arguments about the result being the right one or not.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 18, 2014)

For all the YES voters -  If the NO vote were to win, what kind of majority would you accept? Would you be Ok losing to 50% +1 or do you think this would lead to problems further down the line?

Also, and I apologize if this has been covered elsewhere, but if the YES vote was to win, is there a strategy in place to cover an increase in immigration should the oft-hyped "Fairer Society" come to pass?


----------



## MattM (Sep 18, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			For all the YES voters -  If the NO vote were to win, what kind of majority would you accept? Would you be Ok losing to 50% +1 or do you think this would lead to problems further down the line?

Also, and I apologize if this has been covered elsewhere, but if the YES vote was to win, *is there a strategy in place* to cover an increase in immigration should the oft-hyped "Fairer Society" come to pass?
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:
Having read a fair bit of this thread, what has been covered is the total lack of strategy for any of the possible consequences of a YES vote.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 18, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			For all the YES voters -*  If the NO vote were to win, what kind of majority would you accept? Would you be Ok losing to 50% +1 or do you think this would lead to problems further down the line?*

Also, and I apologize if this has been covered elsewhere, but if the YES vote was to win, is there a strategy in place to cover an increase in immigration should the oft-hyped "Fairer Society" come to pass?
		
Click to expand...

It's going to be close anyway, but a win is a win, you can't really say we are OK losing by 5000 votes but not OK losing by 50 votes. You've still lost and should accept it, no matter that the result is.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Excited/Scared/Emotional

We're very lucky to be alive just now.I'm logging off until sometime tomorrow/Saturday, *I'll be back to accept I was wrong* or to bathe in the warm after glow of smugness*


*only joking a wee bit

Click to expand...

but thats the point, *you're not wrong!* *neither are the NO voters wrong! *

We all want the same thing but NO want to do it from within, it wont be easy nor quick but it's possible. I would almost go so far as to say it's now more probable due to the Referendum (assuming NO are chosen tomorrow) and the 'scare' of damaging the four nations for decades.

That is one main positive out of many that have transpired from the last 3 years of debate.

Now if we can get past the next 24hrs without any bampots kicking off we can show the planet we are a strong, passionate but sensible nation who are united once again.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 18, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			It's going to be close anyway, but a win is a win, you can't really say we are OK losing by 5000 votes but not OK losing by 50 votes. You've still lost and *should* accept it, no matter that the result is.
		
Click to expand...

Should being the important word obviously, but do we think that certain quarters will accept the result and move on if there is only a fraction of a percent in it?


----------



## Fish (Sep 18, 2014)

1 or 2 of these 30 questions raised an eyebrow.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rever-Scotland-votes-Yes.html#v-3789542551001


----------



## Bobirdie (Sep 18, 2014)

voted this morning before work.

happy with my vote and the reasons for my vote.

I reckon its going to be a no vote anyway. Too many folk scared of the unknown which is understandable.

Regardless of the outcome we all have to get together and get on with the decision.

And hopefully we can get on in a peaceful manner within Scotland and the rest of Uk.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 18, 2014)




----------



## Stuey01 (Sep 18, 2014)

So here at last. Today is the day that the future of the United Kingdom is decided by just 9% of the population.

Have no say in it but am hoping for a No vote.


----------



## Birchy (Sep 18, 2014)

Looks like NO is leading with the pound strengthening.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 18, 2014)

Birchy said:



			Looks like NO is leading with the pound strengthening.
		
Click to expand...

Didn't think the had exit polls or anything similar?


----------



## ger147 (Sep 18, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Didn't think the had exit polls or anything similar?
		
Click to expand...

They don't.


----------



## Fish (Sep 18, 2014)

I suppose when or if the No vote is announced, Salmond will spin it into a success saying he got better deals and powers through this campaign for Scotland


----------



## Birchy (Sep 18, 2014)

Fish said:



			I suppose when or if the No vote is announced, Salmond will spin it into a success saying he got better deals and powers through this campaign for Scotland 

Click to expand...

Its all part of the master plan whatever happens


----------



## One Planer (Sep 18, 2014)

Fish said:



			I suppose when or if the No vote is announced, Salmond will spin it into a success saying he got better deals and powers through this campaign for Scotland 

Click to expand...

Or

He falls on his sword?


----------



## Fish (Sep 18, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Or

He falls on his sword?
		
Click to expand...

I hope its a blunt old rusty 1 then


----------



## Bobirdie (Sep 18, 2014)

Stuey01 said:



			So here at last. Today is the day that the future of the United Kingdom is decided by just 9% of the population.

Have no say in it but am hoping for a No vote.
		
Click to expand...


You can thank Mr Cameron for that


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 18, 2014)

Bobirdie said:



			You can thank Mr Cameron for that
		
Click to expand...

That Scotland has 9% population of the UK ?


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 18, 2014)

Sorry if it's been mentioned before, but well done to the R&A for scheduling their vote on admitting women on the same day as the independence vote.  

A great day for burying contentious votes and ensuring that little to no coverage will be given to it in the national press.


----------



## Bobirdie (Sep 18, 2014)

Behave yourself


----------



## freddielong (Sep 18, 2014)

The most important question for me is if Scotland opt out of great Britain and are therefore no longer British does that mean the Open looses its Scottish venues


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 18, 2014)

freddielong said:



			The most important question for me is if Scotland opt out of great Britain and are therefore no longer British does that mean the Open looses its Scottish venues
		
Click to expand...

As the R+A is based in Scotland, and Scotland is the home of Golf, I can't see this happening.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 18, 2014)

freddielong said:



			The most important question for me is if Scotland opt out of great Britain and are therefore no longer British does that mean the Open looses its Scottish venues
		
Click to expand...

According to the R&A, England won't lose it's Open venues.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 18, 2014)

ger147 said:



			According to the R&A, England won't lose it's Open venues.
		
Click to expand...

Ah, but will it loose them? That is the question!


----------



## CMAC (Sep 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Ah, but will it loose them? That is the question!



Click to expand...

Glad it's not just me that's OCD with the abuse that word gets


----------



## CMAC (Sep 18, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			As the R+A is based in Scotland, and Scotland is the home of Golf, I can't see this happening.
		
Click to expand...

plus they will be allowing mini skirted strumpets as members from tonight onwards


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 18, 2014)

CMAC said:



			plus they will be allowing mini skirted strumpets as members from tonight onwards

Click to expand...

Please don't tell me Monty is going to be wearing a miniskirt?? I don't think I could take that.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 18, 2014)

freddielong said:



			The most important question for me is if Scotland opt out of great Britain and are therefore no longer British does that mean the Open looses its Scottish venues
		
Click to expand...


Nope


----------



## MattM (Sep 18, 2014)

freddielong said:



			The most important question for me is if Scotland opt out of great Britain and are therefore no longer British does that mean the Open looses its Scottish venues
		
Click to expand...

Thought they were opting out of the UK not Great Britain? It would take more than a referendum for that to happen!


----------



## Andy808 (Sep 18, 2014)

Teehee!!!!


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 18, 2014)

Andy808 said:












Teehee!!!!
		
Click to expand...

Lol.. Whatever happens, lets just hope the Scots accept it with the humour and good grace they are known for.............. Oh...


----------



## Fish (Sep 18, 2014)

freddielong said:



			The most important question for me is if Scotland opt out of great Britain and are therefore no longer British does that mean the Open looses its Scottish venues
		
Click to expand...

A spokesman for the Royal & Ancient has already confirmed that the rota for the Open would be unaffected in the event of a vote for independence. The tournament rotates among courses in Scotland and England, with the next two slated for north of the border at St Andrews and Royal Troon. It will return to Royal Portrush in Northern Ireland â€“ possibly in 2019 â€“ for the first time since 1951.


----------



## Andy808 (Sep 18, 2014)

Have they gone yet?


----------



## gdc (Sep 18, 2014)

A Yougov poll just released says no at 54%.


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Huge record returns averaging high 80%'s.

Salmond cancels going to his own count and police at Glasgow investigating electoral fraud!

Its all happening.......


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

Fish said:



			Huge record returns averaging high 80%'s.

Salmond cancels going to his own count and police at Glasgow investigating electoral fraud!

Its all happening.......
		
Click to expand...

Apparently 10 seperate incidents of people turning up finding out they have already apparently voted ?!

It appears a few signs suggest looking more towards a No


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Apparently 10 seperate incidents of people turning up finding out they have already apparently voted ?!
		
Click to expand...

Had they popped into Wetherspoons in-between and simply forgot  :mmm:

:cheers:


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

1st result in for the NO campaign 54/46 Clackmanashire.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

Fish said:



			1st result in for the NO campaign
		
Click to expand...

Apparently thats a big surprise as it was supposed to be a win for Yes


----------



## fundy (Sep 19, 2014)

yes vote already a 50/1 shot, betting mkts pretty sure this ones done


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

How on earth did some papers (26) get thrown out, their were only 2 boxes, was it that difficult :rofl:


----------



## fundy (Sep 19, 2014)

Fish said:



			How on earth did some papers (26) get thrown out, their were only 2 boxes, was it that difficult :rofl:
		
Click to expand...

7 of them were that clever they voted for both lol


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 19, 2014)

West Lothian appears to be very close to declaring a NO win. Orkney declaring soon as well....


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

fundy said:



			7 of them were that clever they voted for both lol
		
Click to expand...

You got a spread bet on it?


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 19, 2014)

Whatever the result, some of these turnouts are eyewatering... Over 90% in some areas!!! :clap:


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Whatever the result, some of these turnouts are eyewatering... Over 90% in some areas!!! :clap:
		
Click to expand...

I reckon its a bit like that part in the Commitments and they all just joined the queue......


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Orkney landslide win for NO campaign, no surprise


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 19, 2014)

Fish said:



			I reckon its a bit like that part in the Commitments and they all just joined the queue......

Click to expand...

Lol.. 

Oh, a decent majority for NO in Orkney...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Lol.. 

Oh, a decent majority for NO in Orkney...
		
Click to expand...

Is the picture starting to form


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Is the picture starting to form
		
Click to expand...

Might be a bit too early yet, but a couple more results will form a better picture. Glasgow might be interesting, especially with a reported low (compared to the rest) turnout...


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

2 from 2, more to come. Unfortunately it looks like my area North Lanarkshire will vote yes, I vote for a rise in tax for transporting Buckfast to the area.


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Might be a bit too early yet, but a couple more results will form a better picture. Glasgow might be interesting, especially with a reported low (compared to the rest) turnout...
		
Click to expand...

Amazing that 75% is considered low. YES or NO the Scottish electorate did themselves proud.

British by birth, Scottish by the grace of god, proud to be both.


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Amazing that 75% is considered low. YES or NO the Scottish electorate did themselves proud.

British by birth, Scottish by the grace of god, proud to be both.
		
Click to expand...

I think because so much was at stake everyone had to vote to make sure if they disagreed with the yes or no vote they had the opportunity to counter it, nothing like a general election when policies and promises are reneged on and nobody trusts who ever gets in, this was a biggy.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Amazing that 75% is considered low. YES or NO the Scottish electorate did themselves proud.

British by birth, Scottish by the grace of god, proud to be both.
		
Click to expand...

I did clarify by saying "in comparison to the rest" didn't I??   Fabulous turn out and definitely something to be proud of...


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Shetland another landslide to NO campaign, again no surprise from these island rural areas


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			I did clarify by saying "in comparison to the rest" didn't I??   Fabulous turn out and definitely something to be proud of...
		
Click to expand...

You did Dan, my post wasn't a dig merely highlighting it.


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

A helicopter pilot picking up ballots on Jura was told by an islander that they had had a 100% turnout. Yet to be confirmed 

[edit] Mind you, I've just Googled it and there's only about 200 people live on it !


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Translation please?


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

No by a slimmer margin in Eilean Siar (Western Isles) a strong SNP area


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

4 from 4, good result so far, long way to go


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			4 from 4, good result so far, long way to go
		
Click to expand...

Jura have possibly voted YES, just chatting with a local on Twitter, only about 100 votes though which is 100% turnout


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

Fish said:



			Jura have possibly voted YES, just chatting with a local on Twitter, only about 100 votes though which is 100% turnout 

Click to expand...

Going to happen eventually, it would be good to see some results from the bigger areas before I need to board my plane. Heading back home in 2 hours hopefully, delayed over 6 hours currently


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Another No from Inverclyde but with a variable of only 86 votes  

Biggest one yet I think

Yes 27,243 (49.9%) 
No 27,329 (50.1%) 
Turnout 87.4%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Renfrewshire votes NO, biggest one yet :thup:

Yes 55,466 (47.2%) 
No 62,067 (52.8%) 
Turnout 87.3%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Dundee votes YES in the lowest turnout so far, first blood to the yes brigade

Yes 53,620 (57.3%) 
No 39,880 (42.7%) 
Turnout 78.8%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

West Dunbartonshire votes YES, that will swing the percentages now, 50.2/49.8. game on....

Yes 33,720 (54.0%) 
No 28,776 (46.0%) 
Turnout 87.9%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Midlothian votes NO

Yes 26,370 (43.7%) 
No 33,972 (56.3%) 
Turnout 86.8%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

East Lothian votes NO by a decent margin

Yes 27,467 (38.3%) 
No 44,283 (61.7%) 
Turnout 87.6%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Stirling votes NO

Yes 25,010 (40.2%) 
No 37,153 (59.8%) 
Turnout 90.1%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Falkirk votes NO

Yes 50,489 (46.5%) 
No 58,030 (53.5%) 
Turnout 88.7%


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 19, 2014)

Fantastic to watch the numbers swinging from side to side. Falkirk vote NO and open a sizeable gap. Don't want to got to bed yet!!!


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Angus vote NO

Yes 35,044 (43.7%) 
No 45,192 (56.3%) 
Turnout 85.8%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Dumfries vote NO

Yes 36,614 (34.3%) 
No 70,039 (65.7%) 
Turnout 87.5%


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 19, 2014)

Fish said:



			Dumfries vote NO
		
Click to expand...

Dumfries votes Hell No. Angus was a bit if a surprise as well!!


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

East Renfrewshire votes Yes by a big margin

Yes 24,287 (36.8%) 
No 41,690 (63.2%) 
Turnout 90.5%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Aberdeen (City) votes NO

Yes 59,390 (41.4%) 
No 84,094 (58.6%) 
Turnout 81.7%


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 19, 2014)

I think I'm gonna call it now after the Aberdeen result. I'm calling No by 55% to 45%. And I'm going to bed. I'll leave you to it Robin.


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

East Dunbartonshire votes NO

Yes 30,624 (38.8%) 
No 48,314 (61.2%) 
Turnout 91.0%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			I think I'm gonna call it now after the Aberdeen result. I'm calling No by 55% to 45%. And I'm going to bed. I'll leave you to it Robin.
		
Click to expand...

I fell asleep early and woke up so wide-a-wake 

Is my boredom showing through 

Think your right, although the big boys are yet to appear but some strongholds have been defeated


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Scotland's totals after 17 of 32 declarations: 

Yes 521,441 (43.8%) 
No 670,354 (56.2%)


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 19, 2014)

Oooh, just about to hit the pit and they announce that Glasgow is about to declare. This could be the knockout punch. YES need a big win here.


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

No surprise North Lanarkshire votes YES but not by a convincing margin

Yes 115,783 (51.1%) 
No 110,922 (48.9%) 
Turnout 84.4%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

South Lanarkshire votes NO

Yes 100,990 (45.3%) 
No 121,800 (54.7%) 
Turnout 85.4%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Perth & Kinross votes NO

Yes 41,475 (39.8%) 
No 62,714 (60.2%) 
Turnout 86.9%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Glasgow votes........YES

The biggest to date but not enough of a percentage swing

Yes 194,779 (53.5%) 
No 169,347 (46.5%) 
Turnout 75.0%


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 19, 2014)

Doesn't seem a big enough margin for YES though. Edinburgh should have a bigger NO margin. 

Bed time. Honest.


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

West Lothian votes NO 

Yes 53,342 (44.8%) 
No 65,682 (55.2%) 
Turnout 86.2%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Scottish Borders votes NO

Yes 27,906 (33.4%) 
No 55,553 (66.6%) 
Turnout 87.4%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Scotland's totals after 23 of 32 declarations: 

Yes 1,055,716 (45.7%) 
No 1,256,372 (54.3%)


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

North Ayrshire votes NO 

Yes 47,072 (49.0%) 
No 49,016 (51.0%) 
Turnout 84.4%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

South Ayrshire votes NO

Yes 34,402 (42.1%) 
No 47,247 (57.9%) 
Turnout 86.1%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

East Ayrshire votes NO

Yes 39,762 (47.2%) 
No 44,442 (52.8%) 
Turnout 84.5%


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

Nicola Sturgeon already spinning her loss by saying that the people that voted no was only because they knew more powers were coming, rubbish, it was no anyway!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

All done then - No wins.

happy that we stay as one and that Scotland stay within the Union to keep us united and Great 

But i hope this is a wake up call for Westminster to realise that there is more than just London


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 19, 2014)

Fair result, brilliant turnout.
Well done Scotland.
I think Gordon Brown won the vote late in the day by galvanising the Labour voters.
Very concerned that Cameron will now be unable to deliver the promises he has made on behalf of the Westminster parties

I hope this will now result in a much needed overhaul of UK politics giving greater power to the regions and less power to Westminster.


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 19, 2014)

What did the No voters vote for? Was it Devo Max that swung some of them to No, or was it the status quo they always wanted? The offer of Devo Max may have been made in good faith but will it satisfy both sides of the debate?


----------



## Coatsy79 (Sep 19, 2014)

Well done Scotland

Bet there's a lot of sleepy people up there today!


----------



## Imurg (Sep 19, 2014)

Strictly speaking, anyone who voted No simply voted against Scotland becoming an Independent Country ...that was, after all, the only question on the ballot paper.
Everything else is pure Politics


----------



## MadAdey (Sep 19, 2014)

Been sat here all night with my phone using the live updating page on the BBC website showing how the voting was going. My condolences to any forumers that wanted the 'YES' vote.


----------



## Andy808 (Sep 19, 2014)

So after all that they aren't going!
Bet they keep bleating on about being run by westminster, controlled by another country blah blah blah.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 19, 2014)

English female golfers are the real winners from yesterday.  As they can now be members of the R&A without the need for a passport. Happy days.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Fair result, brilliant turnout.
Well done Scotland.
I think Gordon Brown won the vote late in the day by galvanising the Labour voters.
Very concerned that Cameron will now be unable to deliver the promises he has made on behalf of the Westminster parties

I hope this will now result in a much needed overhaul of UK politics giving greater power to the regions and less power to Westminster.
		
Click to expand...

I think Milliband's days are numbered after this as he could not really galvanise his parties voters from what I saw.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 19, 2014)

Milliband is just plainly unelectable.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Fair result, brilliant turnout.
Well done Scotland.
I think Gordon Brown won the vote late in the day by galvanising the Labour voters.
Very concerned that Cameron will now be unable to deliver the promises he has made on behalf of the Westminster parties

I hope this will now result in a much needed overhaul of UK politics giving greater power to the regions and less power to Westminster.
		
Click to expand...

Agree completely - and about Gordon Brown.  He staunched the flow of Labour to YES and will have reversed many soft-YESs.  And Cameron is now linking timescales of change for Scotland with those for change for England.  I thin that it's going to be difficult for him to hold to this.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 19, 2014)

Imurg said:



			Strictly speaking, anyone who voted No simply voted against Scotland becoming an Independent Country ...that was, after all, the only question on the ballot paper.
Everything else is pure Politics
		
Click to expand...

Might be politics but many, many NO voters voted for additional powers as these have been promised.  If they are not then the independence question is not settled.


----------



## sawtooth (Sep 19, 2014)

Thank God that is all over.

We done to "no" voters you made the right choice.

To "yes" voters cheer up, more powers on their way to Edinburgh - win/win.


----------



## delc (Sep 19, 2014)

Glad that the Jocks are still part of the UK, and that I won't need a passport to cross Hadrian's wall next time I visit Scotland to play golf.


----------



## One Planer (Sep 19, 2014)

Imurg said:



			Strictly speaking, anyone who voted No simply voted against Scotland becoming an Independent Country ...that was, after all, the only question on the ballot paper.
Everything else is pure Politics
		
Click to expand...

:clap: :thup:


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Might be politics but many, many NO voters voted for additional powers as these have been promised.
		
Click to expand...

You know this how!!!

The votes are cast and the question on the ballot paper has been answered. I hope now that AUK will now follow the example of the Scots and vote.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 19, 2014)

Bugger. But all fair in love and politics, NO wins and we have to accept the will of the majority.Well done to Scotland.


----------



## guest100718 (Sep 19, 2014)

I ve not read the 5000+ posts but that was the most unsurpising referendum result there has ever been..


----------



## mikee247 (Sep 19, 2014)

Im glad the right decision has prevailed for this country and for Scotland!   :thup: I just hope Scotland gets the reforms it deserves and that everyone now can move on to a better GB. The pound is on the move this morning already and with the economic recovery taking shape lets be positive and hope this transforms us as a nation collectively.Well done all those who got out there and voted and I'm glad to see that the nationalist thugs who were burning flags and urinating on memorials will have to sneak back into their holes!! :clap:


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Sep 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Agree completely - and about Gordon Brown.  He staunched the flow of Labour to YES and will have reversed many soft-YESs.  And Cameron is now linking timescales of change for Scotland with those for change for England.  I thin that it's going to be difficult for him to hold to this.
		
Click to expand...

Not necessarily since as a result of the Devo Max promises made to Scotland the genie is well and truly out of the bottle in England.

Would not be a good idea for Labour if they are seen to be opposing it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 19, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			You know this how!!!

The votes are cast and the question on the ballot paper has been answered. I hope now that AUK will now follow the example of the Scots and vote.
		
Click to expand...

OK then - the promise of extra powers had very little to do with result.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Fair result, brilliant turnout.
Well done Scotland.
I think Gordon Brown won the vote late in the day by galvanising the Labour voters.
*Very concerned that Cameron will now be unable to deliver the promises he has made on behalf of the Westminster parties*

I hope this will now result in a much needed overhaul of UK politics giving greater power to the regions and less power to Westminster.
		
Click to expand...

it's over, sense prevails. He has made a commitment, affirmed AGAIN this morning.......does he need to come and tell you personally? I thought we would have heard the last of your nonsense now the majority has spoken.


----------



## JustOne (Sep 19, 2014)

What time is Salmond going to be hung, drawn and quartered?

Time to find a leader who represents the Scottish majority!!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 19, 2014)

JustOne said:



			Time to find a leader who represents the Scottish majority!!
		
Click to expand...

That person doesn't exist unfortunately.Not even a majority of the electorate voted NO, although appreciate more voted NO than YES.

I'd like to see Eck stand aside for Sturgeon though.


One other observation.The pro-union media has been quite something to behold, with only one newspaper backing YES.If there had been a more balanced level of support I'm left wondering what kind of affect that would have had.But to repeat, I accept the majority of voters back the union.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 19, 2014)

Bit of a sore head this morning after overdoing it somewhat last night. I went to bed and woke up to see it was all over.

Proud of Scotland not only for rejecting nationalism but for the huge level of engagement we've had on this issue. It's been a rocket up Westminster's arse. Lets hope this can be the start of political reform without the need to break up our country.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			That person doesn't exist unfortunately.Not even a majority of the electorate voted NO, although appreciate more voted NO than YES.

I'd like to see Eck *stand aside for Sturgeon though.*


One other observation.The pro-union media has been quite something to behold, with only one newspaper backing YES.If there had been a more balanced level of support I'm left wondering what kind of affect that would have had.But to repeat, I accept the majority of voters back the union.
		
Click to expand...

Christ! the nightmare continues- vile woman!


----------



## CMAC (Sep 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			OK then - the promise of extra powers had very little to do with result.
		
Click to expand...

nice to see you catching up....eventually


----------



## Stuey01 (Sep 19, 2014)

I am relieved with the result, the UK staying together is the right thing for all of us in the global landscape, in my opinion.

Some strange reactions I've seen from some Yes supporting Scots on Facebook this morning. Lots suggesting the Scottish electorate is spineless. One guy even saying he "hopes we get totally screwed over now". Very odd.

A vote for staying in the UK is not an anti-Scottish vote... The majority believe it is better for Scotland to stay, both sides were pro Scottish just with different opinions on how best to move forward. Lots seem to have missed that point.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 19, 2014)

A wee bit of grace in victory wouldn't go amiss, some of us are hurting pretty badly here.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 19, 2014)

delc said:



			Glad that the Jocks are still part of the UK, and that I won't need a passport to cross Hadrian's wall next time I visit Scotland to play golf.
		
Click to expand...

Just remember when you do go there that some deem that term offensive!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A wee bit of grace in victory wouldn't go amiss, some of us are hurting pretty badly here.
		
Click to expand...

It's a good point. There's no "yes" and "no" now, we're all Scots going forward.

Going to be a wee bit bumpy the next couple of days, at least. A bit of triumphalism on one side and sour grapes on the other is unfortunate but only to be expected.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A wee bit of grace in victory wouldn't go amiss, some of us are hurting pretty badly here.
		
Click to expand...

I think you should still take it as a victory. To galvanise that much debate, that many voters, and the promise of extra powers either way was a brilliant effort, well done.

As I said before, you were one of the few YES voters who I truly felt understood more of the issues, and knew what they wanted, so I can understand why you're hurting. Well done on staying classy throughout the whole campaign. There are a lot of other people (YES and NO) who could learn from that.

If it helps, I'm drinking Irn Bru today to celebrate the Union staying together. And that's not even a joke.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 19, 2014)

I spent last night in the quite excellent Bow Bar in Victoria Street in Edinburgh, there was quite an electric feeling.

Me and my friend sat with a Danish politics student and a Catalan Journalist talking about life as a European and social democracy as we witnessed yesterday.I hope it's not lost and the momentum, UK wide, is continued.


----------



## User62651 (Sep 19, 2014)

Can we have Berwick upon Tweed back in Scotland and you can officially have Doncaster back in England!


----------



## Dodger (Sep 19, 2014)

The no's now need to make sure their masters deliver the 'vows'..... I'll no be holding my breath. We have no chance of a yes while we have a 'national' media who are so hugely supportive of Westminster. 


Scotland shat it.


Never, ever has there been a more hollow phrase than 'Scotland The Brave'. Rise and be a nation again? Give me a break. Time to bin them... Scotland has missed out on a huge, huge opportunity. A year down the line all those No's who are this morning patting themselves on the back will realise how empty the 'victory' actually was.


----------



## JustOne (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A wee bit of grace in victory wouldn't go amiss, some of us are hurting pretty badly here.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure you would reciprocate that sentiment if you'd have 'won' BUT that said I'm sure lots of us appreciate that it must be hard to accept, especially seeing as the vote was indeed pretty close. I'm sure there was a lot of 'breath holding'. My personal sentiment is that common sense prevailed, whether that means anything I'm not sure. At least we should be looking to take the UK FORWARD from this but that's not going to be easy if people are busy licking their wounds or harbouring bitterness.


----------



## Bobirdie (Sep 19, 2014)

Hopefully we can move forward as a nation. Looking at the support both sides of the campaingn received I wish the folk of Scotland would put the same amount of time/effort into St Andrews day as they do for our Irish friends days.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 19, 2014)

Dodger said:



			The no's now need to make sure their masters deliver the 'vows'..... I'll no be holding my breath. We have no chance of a yes while we have a 'national' media who are so hugely supportive of Westminster. 


Scotland shat it.


Never, ever has there been a more hollow phrase than 'Scotland The Brave'. Rise and be a nation again? Give me a break. Time to bin them... Scotland has missed out on a huge, huge opportunity. A year down the line all those No's who are this morning patting themselves on the back will realise how empty the 'victory' actually was.
		
Click to expand...

Wow, could you be any more different to A2D?? How bitter do you sound? You lost. Accept it, and stop criticing the no's.


----------



## MarkA (Sep 19, 2014)

Dodger said:



			The no's now need to make sure their masters deliver the 'vows'..... I'll no be holding my breath. We have no chance of a yes while we have a 'national' media who are so hugely supportive of Westminster. 


Scotland shat it.


Never, ever has there been a more hollow phrase than 'Scotland The Brave'. Rise and be a nation again? Give me a break. Time to bin them... Scotland has missed out on a huge, huge opportunity. A year down the line all those No's who are this morning patting themselves on the back will realise how empty the 'victory' actually was.
		
Click to expand...

A year down the line you'll still be a stable member of a United Kingdom - whereas if you'd got independence you'd have been scrabbling from one crisis to another whilst Salmond made up more lies and disinformation. Never have I heard a politician spout such utter drivel with absolutely nothing to back it up. The real danger was that the 16 and 17 year olds would have swallowed it and ruined there futures! I'm glad your still with us but lets leave the Braveheart rubbish to history. these are difficult times we live in and there are strength in numbers and unity.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 19, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Wow, could you be any more different to A2D?? How bitter do you sound? You lost. Accept it, and stop criticing the no's.
		
Click to expand...

Bitterness?

Swap it for the reality.

We have to live with the result but I truly believe that Scotland will regret it.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 19, 2014)

Anyway I am off to Glencoe for a long weekend among the beauty that is up there.

Enjoy your weekend folks!


----------



## JCW (Sep 19, 2014)

I posted on here it would be a no vote and so it is , come the hour , many voters went with what they know then what was being promise , be a bit of bitterness for a bit then things will settle down


----------



## Stuey01 (Sep 19, 2014)

Cameron statement this morning is interesting. Still committing to further powers for Scotland, and mobilising people to take it forward. Also strongly hinting about devolved powers in England.
This is a momentous day not just for Scotland but for the whole political landscape in the UK.  And we have the Scots who drove this debate to thank for that. Yes may have "lost" but the whole UK could benefit from the change that has started here in the long term.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 19, 2014)

Stuey01 said:



			Cameron statement this morning is interesting. Still committing to further powers for Scotland, and mobilising people to take it forward. Also strongly hinting about devolved powers in England.
This is a momentous day not just for Scotland but for the whole political landscape in the UK.
		
Click to expand...

As I said a while back IF it happens, IF, the Scots should be thanked for improving the political landscape instead of sitting still and middling along.


----------



## JustOne (Sep 19, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Scotland shat it.


Never, ever has there been a more hollow phrase than 'Scotland The Brave'. Rise and be a nation again? Give me a break. Time to bin them... *Scotland has missed out on a huge, huge opportunity.*

Click to expand...

Clearly not. The majority don't want what you want. Must be weird waking up to slag off +55% of your own kin and realise that you live in a Country that *DOESN'T WANT* to go it alone.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 19, 2014)

So the pensioners won it for NO. One man,one vote, but those leaving this mortal coil sooner than most decide the future for the rest of us.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So the pensioners won it for NO. One man,one vote, but those leaving this mortal coil sooner than most decide the future for the rest of us.
		
Click to expand...

What happened to "respect your elders"?

Maybe they have been around for longer, seen a lot more than most, and are in a better place to judge. God forbid, what if they made their decision based on the long term future of their relatives rather than their own short term aims?!


----------



## JustOne (Sep 19, 2014)




----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So the pensioners won it for NO. One man,one vote, but those leaving this mortal coil sooner than most decide the future for the rest of us.
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps that was because the pensioners, of whom you are rather dismissive, had the most to lose and insufficient time to see whether or not independence really would deliver the utopia promised by prominent members of the Yes campaign.

Are you suggesting that the normal democratic procedures should have been suspended and more weight given to the votes of the youngest. Some, not all, of those 16 year olds may have had little idea of the practical realities yet, quite rightly, their vote counted the same as someone of more mature years.

That is democracy. It ain't perfect but so far we have not found anything better.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So the pensioners won it for NO. One man,one vote, but those leaving this mortal coil sooner than most decide the future for the rest of us.
		
Click to expand...

That's your worst post on the thread. Even if the statement is true (and I don't see how it could be verified) the implication that older people's opinions are less valid is pretty poor.

I know you're disappointed but try and retain some perspective.

BTW, I'm a long way off drawing a pension.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 19, 2014)

I thought that might not go down too well.And it's probably rude of me to say, but I'm pretty depressed by that.The future of this country, pretty much across the demographic scale wanted YES, only to be held back by those with less future.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I thought that might not go down too well.And it's probably rude of me to say, but I'm pretty depressed by that.The future of this country, pretty much across the demographic scale wanted YES, only to be held back by those with less future.
		
Click to expand...

You got some sort of poll providing these figures or are you just sulking?

And "held back" is your own conceit. How about "prevented from making a terrible mistake"?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 19, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			You got some sort of poll providing these figures or are you just sulking?
		
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/512895230132371456


----------



## JustOne (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I thought that might not go down too well.And it's probably rude of me to say, but I'm pretty depressed by that.The future of this country, pretty much across the demographic scale wanted YES, only to be held back by those with less future.
		
Click to expand...

Seeing as I don't know..... you have 2 million pensioners out of 3.6 million voters?


----------



## phil78 (Sep 19, 2014)

JustOne said:



			Must be weird waking up to slag off +55% of your own kin and realise that you live in a Country that *DOESN'T WANT* to go it alone.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think weird is really the word, gut wrenchlingly disappointing is closer.


----------



## JCW (Sep 19, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			What happened to "respect your elders"?

Maybe they have been around for longer, seen a lot more than most, and are in a better place to judge. God forbid, what if they made their decision based on the long term future of their relatives rather than their own short term aims?!
		
Click to expand...

Wisdom comes with age , not with everyone  but generally it does with most , what was also good was the turn out which shows a lot more cared about the future , myself , i always vote out of respect to those that laid down their lives in the past so we have the right today


----------



## Stuey01 (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I thought that might not go down too well.And it's probably rude of me to say, but I'm pretty depressed by that.The future of this country, pretty much across the demographic scale wanted YES, only to be held back by those with less future.
		
Click to expand...

Adi2Dassler's Scotland of the future...


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/512895230132371456

Click to expand...

2,000 people, never the best sample....


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/512895230132371456

Click to expand...

18-24's were also No?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/512895230132371456

Click to expand...

Perhaps the votes of women should also be devalued and how to explain the difference between the 16-17 year olds and their older brothers & sisters aged 18-24.

"There's lies, damned lies and ultimately there's statistics!"


----------



## timlongs (Sep 19, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			2,000 people, never the best sample....
		
Click to expand...

Thats a very good sample. For the whole of the UK you only need to sample around 1500 people for it to represent the whole population. 

http://www.select-statistics.co.uk/sample-size-calculator-mean

_[h=4]Sample size[/h]This is the minimum sample size you need to estimate the true population mean with the required margin of error and confidence level. Note that if some people choose not to respond they cannot be included in your sample and so if non-response is a possibility your sample size will have to be increased accordingly. In general, the higher the response rate the better the estimate, as non-response will often lead to biases in your estimate._


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 19, 2014)

timlongs said:



			Thats a very good sample. For the whole of the UK you only need to sample around 1500 people for it to represent the whole population. 

http://www.select-statistics.co.uk/sample-size-calculator-mean

_*Sample size*

This is the minimum sample size you need to estimate the true population mean with the required margin of error and confidence level. Note that if some people choose not to respond they cannot be included in your sample and so if non-response is a possibility your sample size will have to be increased accordingly. In general, the higher the response rate the better the estimate, as non-response will often lead to biases in your estimate._

Click to expand...

Interesting! That actually really surprises me!


----------



## timlongs (Sep 19, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Interesting! That actually really surprises me!
		
Click to expand...

Yeah surprises a lot. My politics degree has actually came in useful for once!


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So the pensioners won it for NO. One man,one vote, but those leaving this mortal coil sooner than most decide the future for the rest of us.
		
Click to expand...

Oh Adi, after the good grace you've debated your case, sometimes against some pretty heated responses...

I seem to remember a poll showing lots of youngsters also felt it was Better Together. I'd be inclined to say that the majority of Yes voters were those that suffered most during the late 70's, early 80's...

As for Gordon Brown's performance... that's the man that should be your next First Minister! I don't like his politics, but what a performance. And he certainly showed up Milliband as being wet, weak and nondescript.


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 19, 2014)

timlongs said:



			Thats a very good sample. For the whole of the UK you only need to sample around 1500 people for it to represent the whole population. 

http://www.select-statistics.co.uk/sample-size-calculator-mean

_[h=4]Sample size[/h]This is the minimum sample size you need to estimate the true population mean with the required margin of error and confidence level. Note that if some people choose not to respond they cannot be included in your sample and so if non-response is a possibility your sample size will have to be increased accordingly. In general, the higher the response rate the better the estimate, as non-response will often lead to biases in your estimate._

Click to expand...

I disagree. For example, if you took that sample from an area that was very pro-Yes, i.e. the centre of Glasgow, you'd get a very different result from, say, Edinburgh.


----------



## timlongs (Sep 19, 2014)

For those complaining about old/young voters etc etc. If anyone had bothered to pay for an exit poll we might actually have had an understanding about how this vote occured. Read this article for more info:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/18/scottish-vote-no-exit-poll-democratic-deficit


----------



## timlongs (Sep 19, 2014)

I disagree. For example, if you took that sample from an area that was very pro-Yes, i.e. the centre of Glasgow, you'd get a very different result from, say, Edinburgh.
		
Click to expand...

True but thats why we do random sampling from areas all over the country. Lord Ashcroft is one of the gods of polling. He is very reliable.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 19, 2014)

Gordon Brown certainly saved the UK.
His 'It is not their flag' speech was quality and turned a lot of heads.

All the experts thought the 16-18 year old's were locked in YES, how wrong were they.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 19, 2014)

right, got a 1.30 tee off at Gleneagles so I'm off to enjoy my country and leave the bitter and twisted YES campaigners to stew in their own bile. Let us all know when you're 'back in the room'.

Well done some of the respectful YES campaigners who accept democracy results without a moan- many could learn from you:thup:


----------



## PieMan (Sep 19, 2014)

My own view is that the only losers from the Referendum are the politicians from all parties and across all four nations of the UK. In Scotland it is the rejection - to a degree - of nationalism and what the SNP represents. I hope this is therefore the case in Wales, NI and England as well. Then in Westminster it is the wake-up call that the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrate parties must do better for all of the people of this great nation of ours. They must also realise that what made Britain 'Great' in the past is just that - in the past. They now have a responsibility to re-draw our 'constitution' to deliver real change for all, and that must mean more powers for the devolved administrations as well as a fairer voice for England on England only issues.

My only worry is that the current crop - and I include those politicians in the respective Scottish, Welsh and NI parliaments, are not up to the task. This also needs to be done right, so need to be realistic and expect change to take time. I expect we'll need a fair bit patience!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			All the experts thought the 16-18 year old's were locked in YES, how wrong were they.
		
Click to expand...

They were 71/29 in favour of independence


----------



## JustOne (Sep 19, 2014)

PieMan said:



			My only worry is that the current crop - and I include those politicians in the respective Scottish, Welsh and NI parliaments, are not up to the task.
		
Click to expand...

When has government EVER been comprised solely of people who ARE up to the job?

It's always the same crap, different day. 

There is no silver spoon, pot at the end of the rainbow, never will be.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			They were 71/29 in favour of independence
		
Click to expand...

Proof they shouldn't have been given the vote  (joke)

Although in all honesty, I don't feel that 16-17 year olds are mature enough to make such a big decision. What you think you know at 17, you find out in the years to come how wrong you were!


----------



## JustOne (Sep 19, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			What you think you know at 17, you find out in the years to come how wrong you were!
		
Click to expand...

Beer should be free!!!! 


....and it's not drinking that causes fights, smashed high streets, full casualty wards or domestic violence


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 19, 2014)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Proof they shouldn't have been given the vote  (joke)

Although in all honesty, I don't feel that 16-17 year olds are mature enough to make such a big decision. What you think you know at 17, you find out in the years to come how wrong you were!
		
Click to expand...

It was a blatant attempt at gerrymandering the vote.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 19, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It was a blatant attempt at gerrymandering the vote.
		
Click to expand...

I don't know who gerry mander is but that doesn't sound good!


----------



## Stuey01 (Sep 19, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It was a blatant attempt at gerrymandering the vote.
		
Click to expand...

Thank goodness the old buggers were there to balance it out


----------



## JustOne (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			They were 71/29 in favour of independence
		
Click to expand...

Until Microsoft offered them free copies of Minecraft and 50 free texts to vote No


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 19, 2014)

I'd bet Â£100 that yes would get between 45-50% of the vote , the actual vote was yes 44.70% so i'm sad and glad.


----------



## gdc (Sep 19, 2014)

Whilst I can empathise with the Yes voters and their sense of an opportunity missed I am happy that you won't be leaving us.

You Scots stand up for who you are and you say it as it is. You should rename yourselves to England 'but without the B*** and with some morales' although that doesn't really roll off the tongue.

Whenever I have been to Scotland I have always thought 'I could live in this place'.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So the pensioners won it for NO. One man,one vote, but those leaving this mortal coil sooner than most decide the future for the rest of us.
		
Click to expand...

No different than 5% of the UK deciding the future of the UK

It starting get very bitter about the result on social media 

Lots of "traitors to the country" etc being posted.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

The map of Scotland and what they decided - red is no 




And this made me giggle


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 19, 2014)

I don't read too much here that is bitter and twisted from disappointed YES voters - but please 'non-Scots' don't tell them that you are pleased Scotland said NO because Scots are friendly and Scotland is a nice place to visit.

I'm OK with a NO though in my heart I am disappointed,


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			A wee bit of grace in victory wouldn't go amiss, some of us are hurting pretty badly here.
		
Click to expand...

Mate, condolences to you and without me massaging your ego you voiced your opinions and backed them up with fact and ignored nothing (unlike a few others)

I take my hat off to you.


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Gordon Brown certainly saved the UK.
His 'It is not their flag' speech was quality and turned a lot of heads.

All the experts thought the 16-18 year old's were locked in YES, how wrong were they.
		
Click to expand...

Almost 3/4 were yes, is that not locked in enough?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Mate, condolences to you and without me massaging your ego you voiced your opinions and backed them up with fact and ignored nothing (unlike a few others)

I take my hat off to you.
		
Click to expand...


Thanks.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Almost 3/4 were yes, is that not locked in enough?
		
Click to expand...

I am not sure I agree with that, how were they able to come up with that figure.
[Other than the small sample exit poll.]


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I am not sure I agree with that, how were they able to come up with that figure.
[Other than the small sample exit poll.]
		
Click to expand...

So we should believe your logic rather than a sample exit poll?


----------



## delc (Sep 19, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Just remember when you do go there that some deem that term (Jocks) offensive!
		
Click to expand...

Meant as a term of endearment. I'm personally delighted that the United Kingdom is still United.


----------



## c1973 (Sep 19, 2014)

Some comments on social media from yes voters/campaigners are absolutely disgraceful. Apparently NO voters are (amongst other things) cowardly p(infractionns). Shocking behaviour! So much for accepting the majority decision! To paraphrase a well known dirge perhaps they should go home tae think again.

Salmond should go now, after all Cameron's jaiket was apparently on a shoogly peg last week. Will he do the decent thing? Will he go? Will he hell! 

Thankfully the majority saw through the nonsense, scaremongering (yep a lot of it was), negativity toward our union of nations, bluster and fag packet economics of the yes campaign and have expressed their desire to remain in this wonderful United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

I now hope our dear friends and neighbours get satisfaction with regards the West Lothian question as well. I feel they deserve it.

On a personal note I no longer need to feel embarrassed about the possibility of walking away from a moral duty to pay a share of the debt. Nor do I need to feel embarrassed about the barely concealed (from some,certainly not all) dislike/contempt/hatred of England and/or its people.



The union is good, the union is strong and the union is intact!  Better together, stronger together and staying together! 

Tonight I shall rejoice and the wine will flow. 

RULE BRITANNIA.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So we should believe your logic rather than a sample exit poll?
		
Click to expand...

Not logic, but information given by teachers.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Not logic, but information given by teachers.
		
Click to expand...

How many teachers ? 

Every single one 

Amazed they didn't pass that info on the the official polls


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 19, 2014)

I've had enough of this rubbish, some pretty unfriendly comments on here towards my country.

BTW Salmond has resigned.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Sep 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I've had enough of this rubbish, some pretty unfriendly comments on here towards my country.

BTW Salmond has resigned.
		
Click to expand...

They only seem to be from the YES camp?! Everyone else has been pretty positive and friendly.

Have a good flounce though.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I've had enough of this rubbish, some pretty unfriendly comments on here towards my country.

BTW Salmond has resigned.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but where are they ?


----------



## JustOne (Sep 19, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Some comments on social media from yes voters/campaigners are absolutely disgraceful. Apparently NO voters are (amongst other things) cowardly p(infractionns). Shocking behaviour! So much for accepting the majority decision! To paraphrase a well known dirge perhaps they should go home tae think again.

Salmond should go now, after all Cameron's jaiket was apparently on a shoogly peg last week. Will he do the decent thing? Will he go? Will he hell! 

Thankfully the majority saw through the nonsense, scaremongering (yep a lot of it was), negativity toward our union of nations, bluster and fag packet economics of the yes campaign and have expressed their desire to remain in this wonderful United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

I now hope our dear friends and neighbours get satisfaction with regards the West Lothian question as well. I feel they deserve it.

On a personal note I no longer need to feel embarrassed about the possibility of walking away from a moral duty to pay a share of the debt. Nor do I need to feel embarrassed about the barely concealed (from some,certainly not all) dislike/contempt/hatred of England and/or its people.



The union is good, the union is strong and the union is intact!  Better together, stronger together and staying together! 

Tonight I shall rejoice and the wine will flow. 

RULE BRITANNIA. 

Click to expand...

:thup:


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 19, 2014)

And the promises made in the last two weeks by the three amigos and then fronted up by Gordon Brown - are they unravelling not even one day in?  Brilliant...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And the promises made in the last two weeks by the three amigos and then fronted up by Gordon Brown - are they unravelling not even one day in?  Brilliant...
		
Click to expand...


Why what has happened ?


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why what has happened ?
		
Click to expand...

Ed has said No.


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why what has happened ?
		
Click to expand...

Nothing, just speculation.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Ed has said No.
		
Click to expand...

Has he ? Said no to what ? He is finished anyway


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Has he ? Said no to what ? He is finished anyway
		
Click to expand...

Google is your friend.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Google is your friend.
		
Click to expand...

Yep googled and nothing to suggest what SILH has mentioned 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/19/scottish-referendum-vote-change-ed-miliband-labour


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

Try the BBC news website.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Try the BBC news website.
		
Click to expand...


Ah yes - seen the headline - shame it doesn't really match up to what has been actually said 

Mr Miliband said the public must be fully involved in a "comprehensive and credible process" to decided how power is dispersed in England, as well as Wales and Northern Ireland.

"The Labour Party will not now sit back and put up a 'business as usual' sign over Westminster," he said. "Nor will I allow this moment to be used for narrow party political advantage.

"We need a response that matches the scale of this moment. That starts with delivering on our promise of further powers to Scotland.

"But other people in Britain, including England, now deserve the chance to shape their own futures with a dynamic devolution settlement."

'More of a voice'
Mr Miliband says he wants a constitutional convention, in the autumn of 2015 to determine the extent of changes needed outside of Scotland, not merely confined to the "Westminster elite".

He said each English region would produce a series of recommendations "covering how sub-national devolution can be strengthened; how the regions can be given more of a voice in our political system; how we can give further voice to regional and national culture and identity'".

These proposals, he added, would then be debated by the Constitutional Convention, with its recommendations then considered by Parliament.

Mr Miliband said reform of the House of Commons, including the role of English and Scottish MPs, would be considered as part of this, as would the case for replacing the House of Lords with a new Senate of the Nations and Regions.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29281819


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

Milliband isn't in a position to deliver anything


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

So the 3 Westminster parties agreement lasted a whole 12 hours after the declaration.


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			So the 3 Westminster parties agreement lasted a whole 12 hours after the declaration.
		
Click to expand...

No, not the case. People need to read beyond headlines


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			So the 3 Westminster parties agreement lasted a whole 12 hours after the declaration.
		
Click to expand...

Please read the articles on what the parties have said ( the leaders ) 

They haven't gone back on any agreement


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			No, not the case. People need to read beyond headlines
		
Click to expand...

Cameron and Miliband are no longer in agreement, nothing to do with headlines.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Cameron and Miliband are no longer in agreement, nothing to do with headlines.
		
Click to expand...

Please point me to where exactly you are getting this info from - a link to an article would be good


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 19, 2014)

Sounds like the SNP have rejected the result and are saying the campaign will never die. So that was a waste of a referendum.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Please point me to where exactly you are getting this info from - a link to an article would be good
		
Click to expand...

It's in the article you posted i.e. Cameron's plan is to change English arrangements in parallel with new powers for Scotland. Ed disagrees, he wants Scottish new powers first and English changes later.

So the 2 big parties leaders are not in agreement with how to proceed.


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So the pensioners won it for NO. One man,one vote, but those leaving this mortal coil sooner than most decide the future for the rest of us.
		
Click to expand...

Adi, that comment is not worthy of you.   I accept you are disappointed but please dont pick on the Old, are they not worthy members of your country?


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 19, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			So the pensioners won it for NO. One man,one vote,* but those leaving this mortal coil sooner than most decide the future for the rest of us*.
		
Click to expand...

Isn't that how it works at most golf clubs?


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			It's in the article you posted i.e. Cameron's plan is to change English arrangements in parallel with new powers for Scotland. Ed disagrees, he wants Scottish new powers first and English changes later.

So the 2 big parties leaders are not in agreement with how to proceed.
		
Click to expand...

Hardly surprising.

Milliband is naturally concerned if Scottish members at Westminster were unable to vote on English issues the Labour Party would be unlikely to enjoy a majority on those issues. 

Pity he didn't have a chat with Gordon Brown before the latter made his recent speech.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Hardly surprising.

Milliband is naturally concerned if Scottish members at Westminster were unable to vote on English issues the Labour Party would be unlikely to enjoy a majority on those issues. 

Pity he didn't have a chat with Gordon Brown before the latter made his recent speech.
		
Click to expand...

Fortunately I'm not one of the 16 or 17 year olds who voted this time around so I'm not exactly shocked. 12 hours is a poor show though, could at least have tried to kid us on for a week or two.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 19, 2014)

I think if Alec Salmond had explained things half as well and clear as Adi2Dassler has done on this forum,  the result might have been different . 

Well done Adi , i applaud you sir . :thup::cheers:


----------



## Fish (Sep 19, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Some comments on social media from yes voters/campaigners are absolutely disgraceful. Apparently NO voters are (amongst other things) cowardly p(infractionns). Shocking behaviour! So much for accepting the majority decision! To paraphrase a well known dirge perhaps they should go home tae think again.

Salmond should go now, after all Cameron's jaiket was apparently on a shoogly peg last week. Will he do the decent thing? Will he go? Will he hell! 

Thankfully the majority saw through the nonsense, scaremongering (yep a lot of it was), negativity toward our union of nations, bluster and fag packet economics of the yes campaign and have expressed their desire to remain in this wonderful United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

I now hope our dear friends and neighbours get satisfaction with regards the West Lothian question as well. I feel they deserve it.

On a personal note I no longer need to feel embarrassed about the possibility of walking away from a moral duty to pay a share of the debt. Nor do I need to feel embarrassed about the barely concealed (from some,certainly not all) dislike/contempt/hatred of England and/or its people.



The union is good, the union is strong and the union is intact!  Better together, stronger together and staying together! 

Tonight I shall rejoice and the wine will flow. 

RULE BRITANNIA. 

Click to expand...

:thup:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			I think if Alec Salmond had explained things half as well and clear as Adi2Dassler has done on this forum,  the result might have been different . 

Well done Adi , i applaud you sir . :thup::cheers:
		
Click to expand...

He has explaine dhis point well but again its the same with the rest of the Yes - the crucial answers from the big questions were still missing 

Currency
Jobs
Defence
Budgets
Banks
Big companies.


----------



## Stuey01 (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			It's in the article you posted i.e. Cameron's plan is to change English arrangements in parallel with new powers for Scotland. Ed disagrees, he wants Scottish new powers first and English changes later.

So the 2 big parties leaders are not in agreement with how to proceed.
		
Click to expand...

So they are in disagreement about the timing of English reforms... Which was something that came up this morning, after the referendum and not affecting any promises made about Scotland that they have explicitly been at pains to state their commitment to...

Stop being so bloody negative.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

Stuey01 said:



			So they are in disagreement about the timing of English reforms... Which was something that came up this morning, after the referendum and not affecting any promises made about Scotland that they have explicitly been at pains to state their commitment to...

Stop being so bloody negative.
		
Click to expand...

The timing was part of the "vow" i.e. the timetable that Gordon Brown was stressing just a few days ago.  Cameron is trying to add English reforms to the mix, Miliband won't support that.  I'm not being negative, merely accurate i.e. the agreement between the major Westminster parties has already hit the skids.


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			It's in the article you posted i.e. Cameron's plan is to change English arrangements in parallel with new powers for Scotland. Ed disagrees, he wants Scottish new powers first and English changes later.

So the 2 big parties leaders are not in agreement with how to proceed.
		
Click to expand...

So in agreement just differing time scales


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			So in agreement just differing time scales
		
Click to expand...

Not in agreement about English and Scottish changes in parallel.

The timescales were part of the "vow".


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Live footage shown on BBC 1 Scotland.  Large crowd waving union jacks, singing rule britannia and lobbing missiles.  Police dealing with the crowd.  There is also a smaller Yes Scotland crowd who were already in the square, singing Flower of Scotland and lobbing missiles in the other direction.

Hopefully it's just tonight but deffo not the night to take the wife into town for a drink and a meal.
		
Click to expand...

I really do hope this vote hasnt started to cause your country to tear itself apart.


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Not in agreement about English and Scottish changes in parallel.
		
Click to expand...

But they haven't backed down on the changes of Scottish powers though, so I don't see the problem.

People hear what the want.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Kicking off about what ?

And do you have a link to the report
		
Click to expand...

Do they need an excuse?
It was on Reporting Scotland 30 mins ago.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			But they haven't backed down on the changes of Scottish powers though, so I don't see the problem.

People hear what the want.
		
Click to expand...

The timescales were part of the "vow".

Cameron has changed the scope of the changes but wants to keep the same timescale, Ed disagrees.  It's simple enough to understand.


----------



## Val (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			The timescales were part of the "vow".

Cameron has changed the scope of the changes but wants to keep the same timescale, Ed disagrees.  It's simple enough to understand.
		
Click to expand...

I don't see the problem personally, the changes are still coming


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 19, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Do they need an excuse?
It was on Reporting Scotland 30 mins ago.
		
Click to expand...

It appears both sides are having a pop - not sure why you didnt mention Yes campaigners causing a bit of agro.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why is it ridiculous - feelings are running very high right now something could spark something bigger off.
		
Click to expand...

If it sounds ridiculous and looks ridiculous, it's ridiculous...

Just a bunch of neds with a few flags, songs and 24hrs straight on the drink.  Everyone will be back at work on Monday as normal.


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why is it ridiculous - feelings are running very high right now something could spark something bigger off.
		
Click to expand...

Just another normal Friday night in Glasgow.:smirk:


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 19, 2014)

ger147 said:



			Just a bunch of neds with a few flags, songs and 24hrs straight on the drink.  Everyone will be back at work on Monday as normal.
		
Click to expand...

I'd have expected much the same of most towns/Cities in England TBH.. Some people just like to make a nuisance, then go home and sleep it off...


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 19, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why is it ridiculous - feelings are running very high right now something could spark something bigger off.
		
Click to expand...

Think thats bad. have you ever been at the Friday night, second house, Glasgow Empire?   Now thats scary!


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 19, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Think thats bad. have you ever been at the Friday night, second house, Glasgow Empire?   Now thats scary!
		
Click to expand...

Wow you're going back , it closed about 40 years ago. They sold rotten fruit at the entrance, no prisoners taken in the Empire.:lol:


----------



## freddielong (Sep 19, 2014)

Salmond missed a trick getting the scots to vote yes would have been easy, just promise them an independence day bank holiday and party every year


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 19, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			Wow you're going back , it closed about 40 years ago. They sold rotten fruit at the entrance, no prisoners taken in the Empire.:lol:
		
Click to expand...

Frued said that humour was attributed to the relief of latent sexual frustrations for the proletariat.   I don't believe he had done a stand up comedy act there


----------



## MadAdey (Sep 19, 2014)

Strange one last night. Stood in the toilet of a Mexican sports bar, in California, chatting to a middle aged Scotsman....

He he really summed this vote up to me. This is basically what he said about it...

He would love more than for Scotland to have its independence and make all of its own decisions, but he would always vote against it due to the risk to the Scottish economy and the effect it could have on the country. He said that 'Scotland the Brave!' would vote for independence, but he said 'Scotland the intelligent' would vote against it as the gamble is not worth it if it goes tits up. He said that he would prefer Scotland to be governed by Westminster, rather than having to come cap in hand in 5 years time because it has not worked. That would just put Scotland in a compromising position where westminster could do what ever they wanted to them.

I do no think he was saying that people voting for it aren't intelligent, I think he was inferring that they are voting with their heart, not with their head.


----------



## NWJocko (Sep 19, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Mate, condolences to you and without me massaging your ego you voiced your opinions and backed them up with fact and ignored nothing (unlike a few others)

I take my hat off to you.
		
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more.

Sure it's not been an easy day for you Adi but every respect for the way you've outlined your belief on what an independent Scotland could look like which, probably unfortunately for the Yes campaign, was a much wider view than some of the more detailed Issues that, in the long term, would have been worked out but dominated large parts of the debate.

I'm happy it was a No, but take no pleasure in the sadness of Yes-sers.......


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 19, 2014)

Milliband wanting to re-enfranchise Scottish Labour voters, and arguing with Cameron about the time table - now there's a huge shock!! 

Are people really that naive and dense! Lets just say, on the backing of some stunning performances by Gordon Brown, Ed the ned engenders more Labour support in Scotland and even ends up with more Labour MP's from there in the next election... wonder how that would enhance Labour's chances of governing the UK following the next election?

Why do people lap up so much rubbish from politicians that are just looking after there own interests?


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 20, 2014)

MadAdey said:



			Strange one last night. Stood in the toilet of a Mexican sports bar, in California, chatting to a middle aged Scotsman....

He he really summed this vote up to me. This is basically what he said about it...

He would love more than for Scotland to have its independence and make all of its own decisions, but he would always vote against it due to the risk to the Scottish economy and the effect it could have on the country. He said that 'Scotland the Brave!' would vote for independence, but he said 'Scotland the intelligent' would vote against it as the gamble is not worth it if it goes tits up. He said that he would prefer Scotland to be governed by Westminster, rather than having to come cap in hand in 5 years time because it has not worked. That would just put Scotland in a compromising position where westminster could do what ever they wanted to them.

I do no think he was saying that people voting for it aren't intelligent, I think he was inferring that they are voting with their heart, not with their head.
		
Click to expand...

A reasonable attitude and one that I'm sure was in the minds of many of the 'undecideds' who eventually voted 'No'.

But I think he was wrong! Scotland has a similar economy to many very successful countries - New Zealand, the Nordic group and even Switzerland. And I have little doubt that it would have survived and prospered as as independent country - possibly better than it will as part of the Union.

Indicates, to me, that the message of how it would get to the 'truly independent' state - the transition - was not convincing enough. 

In effect, the 'no Currency Union' bluff worked!

Perhaps a lesson for the next generation? Though I suspect the situation with Oil/Gas (worldwide even) will be decidedly different by then!


----------



## c1973 (Sep 20, 2014)

I think it will be interesting to see if the yes campaigners actually do accept the will of the Scottish people and get onside with the victors to move forward, in the same manner no campaigners were expected to get on board had they lost.  I fear they won't accept the will of the Scottish people and will, instead,  put more effort into sniping from the sidelines and revert back to type of blaming Westminster and/or the English and/or the Torys. 

It would be a shame as there is an opportunity to amend the system now, tweak the engine to get it performing more effectively if you will, but I think the sniping and party politics will lead to this brief (imo) opportunity being lost.


----------



## DCB (Sep 20, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Scotland will vote again next year in the general election then a party the vast majority don't vote for will get into power.....where is the democracy in that?
.
		
Click to expand...

By your argument it's just like our lot up here, the majority didn't vote for SNP at the last Scottish Election, but, that's democracy in action. We ended up with a Government that more people didn't vote for than voted for it. You either vote and play your part, or, you don't vote and you abdicate responsibility. Whatever you do you have to get on with life after the event, you can't keep looking back at what might have been.


----------



## c1973 (Sep 20, 2014)

Interesting that Dundee and Glasgow had two of the lowest turnouts and were both yes wins. 

Were no voters overconfident in these cities? Perhaps thinking they didn't need to turnout to sway the vote.


----------



## c1973 (Sep 20, 2014)

At least we get to keep using the pound, surely that's of some comfort to the yes campaign.


----------



## c1973 (Sep 20, 2014)

Valentino said:



			That is democracy, dress it up which ever way you like dodger, it is what it is. Worth noting though that Scotland has had the government it voted for in every general election since the 50's up until the last one.
		
Click to expand...


Not quite true, but not far off the mark according to this http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/debunk/vote1

Two thirds of the time we get what we want (according to the link) , some would say that's perfectly acceptable.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 20, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Not quite true, but not far off the mark according to this http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/debunk/vote1

Two thirds of the time we get what we want (according to the link) , some would say that's perfectly acceptable.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link, very interesting.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 20, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			How did you feel when Labour won 3 GEs with Scotland voting for Labour in the majority?

Was that democracy?

Edit, Val beat me to it!!
		
Click to expand...

It has been said loads of times on here that many SNP voters vote tactically at a GE for Labour.

I had a phone call a we while ago from a No voting friend who admitted he made a big mistake.


----------



## NWJocko (Sep 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			It has been said loads of times on here that many SNP voters vote tactically at a GE for Labour.

I had a phone call a we while ago from a No voting friend who admitted he made a big mistake.
		
Click to expand...

I haven't seen that said.....

So, you vote "tactically" and the party you vote for is elected.

Does that not mean your tactic has worked and you have elected the party to power then!!!???

Edit, there are a lot of No voters who will feel they haven't made a mistake, what point were you trying to make?


----------



## DCB (Sep 20, 2014)

A lot depends on where you stay and the history of the electorate in the area. I've certainly voted 'tactically' in the past to try and elect who I consider as the best bet. They certainly weren't my preferred choice, so, I've voted in what ends up a two horse race.

Come the 2015 General Election, it'll probably be a two horse race in my home constituency, neither would be my preferred choice, but, you chose the one that may do best for the area.


----------



## c1973 (Sep 20, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			It has been said loads of times on here that many SNP voters vote tactically at a GE for Labour.

*I had a phone call a we while ago from a No voting friend who admitted he made a big mistake.*

Click to expand...

So, they want the snp but vote Labour and then greet about not getting the Government they want?  That seems logical.

Tactical voting may make sense to some (and I do believe some will do this), but it's a bit rich if they then complain about the result, which seemed to be a recurring theme of the yes supporters flawed campaign tbh.

*did they mean to call someone else? *


----------



## DCB (Sep 20, 2014)

Right Gents, The thread has had a clean out of several posts that emanated from insensitive comments on a football related post within this politics thread.  Keep the thread on track and please leave the emotive language that football tribalism brings out on the sidelines where it belongs.

DCB


----------



## c1973 (Sep 20, 2014)

Should there not be an election for Holyrood now? With the snp being elected on an independence ticket and the First Minister announcing (via the media outlets not viewed to be against him*) his decision to stand aside it might not be a bad idea imo. 

*SPJA to hold an EGM to discuss and respond to various members not being allowed into Bute House  to report on the resignation. Certain journalists were allegedly excluded at Salmonds behest as they were viewed to be against him and/or his failed independence bid. Appaling behaviour from a man chosen to represent a nation if true. Surely a story of this magnitude should have seen all press members accommodated, regardless of politics.

Or was this one last petty act from our outgoing megalomaniac leader that we should allow him in exchange for doing the decent thing and going (albeit making sure the news was still all about him and attempting to steal NO campaigns thunder with his timing of said announcement)?


----------



## User62651 (Sep 20, 2014)

SNP were not elected on an independence ticket as proven by the referendum result, they are elected to do right by Scotland within the UK and because Labour made such an arse of things 5 or 6 yrs ago. Like Salmond or not he was a decent first minister getting a good deal for Scotland, all politicians of note eventually get burned and getting out now was the correct thing to do, as for the No campaigns 'thunder' as you call it, I would have said there was intentionally no thunder due to them knowing close to half the country was opposed and the whole referendum being divisive which was the right way to behave imo so Salmond's timing was not through megalomania just realism he's gone as far as he could. Rather than SNP being deposed I suspect we'll need to get used to an SNP majority at Holyrood for the foreseeable, as the independence issue has now passed Scotland's electorate may well keep them in power in Edinburgh as the only party with absolute commitment to Scotland i.e not having to tow the UK party line and given the 3 UK party leaders Vow will probably come to nothing, those vow commitments will need to be chased hard by Edinburgh. I suspect it will all mean bugger all to the poor man in the street however (yet more taxation to fund all the extra politicians) whichever part of the UK you live in but lets give them until Burns night 25th Jan to see if they are collectively serious or not.  Labour already see pitfalls with Tories gaining advantage. Rearranging the constitution does not instantly make a skilled workforce or create real jobs or economic conditions attractive to major foreign investors. We live in slight hope though after Friday.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 20, 2014)

over 164000 views
over 5100 posts, some heated and passionate.....:thup: some sensible:thup: and some in fairyland

along comes the football related posts and in minutes the whole things goes t1ts up, quite sad and one main reason I don't follow any Scottish football anymore.


----------



## Val (Sep 20, 2014)

This thread has been one of the best threads this forum has had and it would be a shame for football and religion to ruin it.

My first thought today, the referendum is finished so how many balls will I lose in the medal today and who will burst my coupon today, life goes back to normal


----------



## MadAdey (Sep 21, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			A reasonable attitude and one that I'm sure was in the minds of many of the 'undecideds' who eventually voted 'No'.

But I think he was wrong! Scotland has a similar economy to many very successful countries - New Zealand, the Nordic group and even Switzerland. And I have little doubt that it would have survived and prospered as as independent country - possibly better than it will as part of the Union.

Indicates, to me, that the message of how it would get to the 'truly independent' state - the transition - was not convincing enough. 

In effect, the 'no Currency Union' bluff worked!

Perhaps a lesson for the next generation? Though I suspect the situation with Oil/Gas (worldwide even) will be decidedly different by then!
		
Click to expand...

I think that could have one of the reasons why the vote was a 'NO'. People in the undecided category maybe did not see and hear enough to enforce that a yes vote is the right thing to do. He commented that the right things where being said to keep the Pro independence people onside, but if he was able to vote the he would have gone with 'NO' as not enough was being done to sway people like himself who where sat on the fence. I think he was more or less going with the old "better the devil you know, than the devil you don't" attitude.

It was close and with some better tactics to get people onside it would not have taken much to sway the vote, at the end of the day they needed under 200,000 votes more to win, less that 5% of the vote. If the loss had been something like 70/30 then it could never have happened as that would have been a huge amount of voters to win over.

Out of curiosity, who on here voted what (if they want to disclose it that is) and briefly say why. I have found a lot of intelligent people on the political threads here and wondered just what made you vote what you did. I'm just curious as to what the deciding factor was.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 21, 2014)

How the heck did it get into football and religion or is the answer that obvious - 


Anyway - Salmond talking about no voters being lied to and regretting their vote - sounds a bit bitter tbh


http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29296282


----------



## c1973 (Sep 21, 2014)

My own personal opinion is that yes were never actually as close as polls suggested. I've said there would be at least 10% difference all along. Keep in mind that although there was a large turnout, around 15% never voted. I take that to mean they did not want independence either!

I also lean toward the belief (as many people I know do) that a hefty percentage of the 'don't knows' were always NO voters. They were just apprehensive about admitting they were in the NO camp as the accusations of being a traitor, a sassenach, a coward, feart ,etc etc. were intimidating to many. Yep, promises from NO in the last few days may have swayed some, but I genuinely don't believe it was a significant amount, I reckon the majority had made their mind up prior to this.  

In my opinion the Yes campaign done nowhere near enough to convince that independence was;
A) Affordable.  Or B) Neccesary.

They didn't answer the questions put to them convincingly. Nonsense, blatantly not true and scaremongering (and in the case of defence) who's going to attack us are not sufficient answers I'm afraid. 

I make no apologies that I am a Unionist and as far as the UK / Crown is concerned a Loyalist (being a loyalist is nothing to do with religion for me, before the usual suspects pile in). I'm also generally to the left of our political spectrum so a well thought out plan for a more socially equal society would be something I could possibly be drawn to. My mind can be changed though, I'm not blindly loyal to anything, however, nothing the Yes campaign came up with convinced me, they didn't really get close. 

There were many turnoffs for me, chiefly the threat of walking away from our share of the debt. I found that to be embarrassing. We all knew that Trident was their gambling chip in the currency union argument, but Yes couldn't admit to this as they would have lost many, many supporters if they did. 

Now I feel that if we are to unite a divided nation the Yes campaign needs to disassociate itself from all this social media nonsense of 'we are the 45', demand a recount, claims of rigged election, boycotts of businesses in favour of NO (many Scottish ones!) and the unacceptable general abuse of those who voted NO. They need to do this and they need to do it quickly and unequivocally.

I also feel they should stick to the pre referendum promise of accepting 'the will of the Scottish people' who said NO to independence by ruling out any attempts to engineer a 'neverendum' by stating that it is off the agenda for many years.

Scotland spoke and Scotland said NO. Accept this, as promised, and move on. The nation does not need to be divided again.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 21, 2014)

Is everyone on here convinced that the three London Party leaders will be able to deliver their very late referendum promises to Scotland?

I, along with about 250,000 other postal voters never had a chance to consider them.


----------



## DCB (Sep 21, 2014)

Ladies and Gents, 

Another clean up has been necessary. Please keep the thread on topic and keep football tribalism out of it. Last warning on this matter. The thread will be locked, which will be a great shame but, if it isn't used properly and within the Forum Rules then there is no other option.

DCB


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 21, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Is everyone on here convinced that the three London Party leaders will be able to deliver their very late referendum promises to Scotland?

I, along with about 250,000 other postal voters never had a chance to consider them.
		
Click to expand...

I think you'll get what Scotland was promised, but I doubt if Labour and the Liberals are keen a long standing wish of the Tory's ref English MPs only voting on English matters.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 21, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			I think you'll get what Scotland was promised, but I doubt if Labour and the Liberals are keen a long standing wish of the Tory's ref English MPs only voting on English matters.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think you will be able to find a Scotsman who would disagree with your comment.
I think that there is a gentleman's agreement in place where that happens now.
England has to establish it's own devolved Parliament, like Scotland, and leave Westminster for the UK politicians.


----------



## drdel (Sep 22, 2014)

I see Mr Salmond is now saying there are other ways for Scotland to become independent !

So he got his referendum but when the majority turns down his option he'll ignore it and try another route.

My family tree has Scottish roots but I must say I left wondering if democracy will ever deliver what the Yes supporters want. It seems to me the Yes side continue to want preferential treatment by all means possible with the rest of us footing the bill. Scotland already enjoys our subsidy but appears, like most who get something for nothing, to want more. 

The Oil debate ignores the investment by people from across the UK and the Yes supports want to share the UK's benefits but when it comes to sharing the Oil - no way. All of a sudden the advantages of the UK's common shared efforts in WW2, the EU and global business turns to selfish in-fighting.

The Yes campaign is still saying "...give me some of what you have, but I'm keep all I have!"

I for one have been more convinced by the "Yes's" rhetoric after the vote that I'm against giving Scotland any more - if we are all British as part of the UK then we should all enjoy the same benefits in Health, Education tax etc.

If the No supporters really were fooled by Politicians' promises then they aren't smart enough to govern themselves!!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

I am a bit intrigued why Cameron and others think "There can be no disputes, no reruns â€“ we have heard the settled will of the Scottish people"

What makes him think that? Maybe no rerun in the next 25yrs can currently be envisaged - but that is not to say that circumstances might change sufficiently for there to be a reasonable case.  The case for independence does not go away just because the current electorate don't want it.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I am a bit intrigued why Cameron and others think "There can be no disputes, no reruns â€“ we have heard the settled will of the Scottish people"

What makes him think that? Maybe no rerun in the next 25yrs can currently be envisaged - but that is not to say that circumstances might change sufficiently for there to be a reasonable case.  *The case for independence does not go away just because **the* current *electorate don't want it*.
		
Click to expand...

are you just going to adopt Robert The Bruce spider 'story' and just keep going till its a yes?

It was a HUGE NO at the start of the campaign and only close near the end for all the wrong reasons.

Independence was going to be forever, why cant no independence be viewed the same way?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

CMAC said:



			are you just going to adopt Robert The Bruce spider 'story' and just keep going till its a yes?

It was a HUGE NO at the start of the campaign and only close near the end for all the wrong reasons.

Independence was going to be forever, why cant no independence be viewed the same way?
		
Click to expand...

I would be interested to hear what your version of 'the wrong reasons' were.

Historically and going into the referendum it has always been 30/70 for Independence.
A week before all polls/opinion was that it was too 'close to call'.
Gordon Brown and the sweetie package changed that.

Not far off half of Scotland wanted to leave the UK, surprisingly not all of them were deep fried mars bar haggis eaters.
You cannot just dismiss that number of a countries residents.

There are a lot of disappointed Scots on both sides of the argument now that the Three Amegos have reverted to form.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			There are a lot of disappointed Scots on both sides of the argument now that the Three Amegos have reverted to form.
		
Click to expand...

Not really sure what people expected would have been achieved by this point. The time to kick up a fuss is if and when the extra powers fail to materialise.

However, that doesn't fit the SNP agenda. They don't want the new powers to be delivered, they want unrest so they can continue to manipulate and divide the people of Scotland. Until they eventually force independence - their sole reason for existing and the thing they prize above the good of the country.

We have had the longest political campaign in memory and it energised the people like never before. We were a beacon of democracy throughout the world. But a fundamental aspect of democracy is to accept the democratic will of the people; which was NO. 

Salmond is the only one who has, so far, reneged on a pledge by failing to accept the democratic result of the referendum.


----------



## Dodger (Sep 22, 2014)

Surely we need to give them time to deliver?

It aint going to happen overnight and neither it should.

Brown saying something would be on the table the next day was just Brown being Brown......again.


----------



## StuartD (Sep 22, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Surely we need to give them time to deliver?
It aint going to happen overnight and neither it should.

Brown saying something would be on the table the next day was just Brown being Brown......again.
		
Click to expand...

OMG I agree with dodger!!

I'm away for a lie down


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

The result will only happen when the three London leaders put the pledged promises in place.
IMO if that does not happen the result is null and void.
I strongly believe that they will not be able to manage this against their MP's wishes.
Pledges that I never had a chance to consider before I cast my vote BTW.

Trust in a Tory government to do the right thing by Scotland..........lets wait and see.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



*lets wait and see.*

Click to expand...

Oh well, I agree with that bit at least.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

CMAC said:



			are you just going to adopt Robert The Bruce spider 'story' and just keep going till its a yes?

It was a HUGE NO at the start of the campaign and only close near the end for all the wrong reasons.

Independence was going to be forever, why cant no independence be viewed the same way?
		
Click to expand...

Why on earth should it be viewed in the same way.  The current electorate have 'spoken' and that is that - possibly for the current generation - so let's say 25 yrs - maybe 50yrs if you want to assume the push from the electorate just won't be there for that time.  But I heard quite a few NO voters saying they were unsure so were voting NO but were also saying that they might expect a revisit of the question some time in the future.  

Unless you make it impossible under law for another referendum on this matter to EVER be held - and I read Jack Straw's thoughts along these lines - why should the SNP not maintain a long term vision of an independent Scotland if that is what they want to do?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			The result will only happen when the three London leaders put the pledged promises in place.
IMO if that does not happen the result is null and void.
I strongly believe that they will not be able to manage this against their MP's wishes.
Pledges that I never had a chance to consider before I cast my vote BTW.

Trust in a Tory government to do the right thing by Scotland..........lets wait and see.
		
Click to expand...

The result cannot be made null and void unless they found some irregularities in the voting 

Scotland voted no

Time to understand your   Country has spoken


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The result cannot be made null and void unless they found some irregularities in the voting 

Scotland voted no

Time to understand your   Country has spoken
		
Click to expand...

For the time being...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			For the time being...

Click to expand...


The vote is not even a week old and people talking  about it being null and void or talking about the next one ?!

Is it that to accept the result ?


----------



## CMAC (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



*Why on earth should it be viewed in the same way.*  The current electorate have 'spoken' and that is that - possibly for the current generation - so let's say 25 yrs - maybe 50yrs if you want to assume the push from the electorate just won't be there for that time.  But I heard quite a few NO voters saying they were unsure so were voting NO but were also saying that they might expect a revisit of the question some time in the future.  

Unless you make it impossible under law for another referendum on this matter to EVER be held - and I read Jack Straw's thoughts along these lines - why should the SNP not maintain a long term vision of an independent Scotland if that is what they want to do?
		
Click to expand...

because the great Alex Salmond went on an on pre referendum that all parties have agreed in writing to ACCEPT the decision of the Scottish People- he emphasised this point no doubt thinking he would win.

The SNP's whole reason for existence in to bugger up the UK by separating it so they always will, no-one is saying they cant have a vision of independent Scotland the same way the Klingon party's vision is to have their language officially recognized like their religion.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

CMAC said:



			because the great Alex Salmond went on an on pre referendum that all parties have agreed in writing to ACCEPT the decision of the Scottish People- he emphasised this point no doubt thinking he would win.

The SNP's whole reason for existence in to bugger up the UK by separating it so they always will, no-one is saying they cant have a vision of independent Scotland the same way the Klingon party's vision is to have their language officially recognized like their religion.

Click to expand...

Decision is accepted - but that doesn't mean to say it can't be revisited in 25yrs or 50yrs time.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Decision is accepted - but that doesn't mean to say it can't be revisited in 25yrs or 50yrs time.
		
Click to expand...

True, but it does mean that people should stop harping on about it, and try to move forward in a way that improves things for everyone concerned.. :thup:


----------



## ger147 (Sep 22, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			True, but it does mean that people should stop harping on about it, and try to move forward in a way that improves things for everyone concerned.. :thup:
		
Click to expand...

I agree 100%.

As a Scot who lives and works here and had my say in last week's referendum, I am happy that the Scottish people have had their say and it's time to move on.

I would like the immediate future to be about addressing the issues that impact our daily lives both here in Scotland and across the whole of the UK.  When the next referendum will be (if there will ever be another one) wouldn't make my list of top 100 questions.


----------



## CMAC (Sep 22, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			True, but it does mean that people should stop harping on about it, and try to move forward in a way that improves things for everyone concerned.. :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Exactly!!:thup:


Not only not moving on, but now they are crying 'fix'! and showing videos declaring the voting was rigged. Then you get the likes of doon frae troon saying its null and void as the UK govt hasn't set in stone the exact timings a few days after the decision. C'mon

Not sure how many times they have to say on Camera and in writing it will happen for you to accept it-


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			True, but it does mean that people should stop harping on about it, and try to move forward in a way that improves things for everyone concerned.. :thup:
		
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree.  But let's not pretend that the objective of independence for Scotland is dead - that what we have today is somehow the settled and final outcome.  It almost certainly is for a generation (25yrs+) unless something extraordinary comes up.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 22, 2014)

So the fact that the majority that voted in the referendum voted no I s not being accepted by the Yes campaign. Normal tactic for nationalists. Time to give it a rest for at least 85 years as the vote did include 16 year olds.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			So the fact that the majority that voted in the referendum voted no I s not being accepted by the Yes campaign. Normal tactic for nationalists. Time to give it a rest for at least 85 years as the vote did include 16 year olds.
		
Click to expand...

A generation is not 85yrs - 25yrs is commonly accepted.  And if when today's 16yr olds are 41 - and todays 65yr olds will be 90 - that seems a reasonable timescale to look again to test any significant demand that there may be out there for independence.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			So the fact that the majority that voted in the referendum voted no I s not being accepted by the Yes campaign. Normal tactic for nationalists. Time to give it a rest for at least 85 years as the vote did include 16 year olds.
		
Click to expand...

Of course I accept the result and the will of the Scottish people. I am also saying is that the result was gained by last minute fag packet panic measures by the London leaders of promises that they will find hard to deliver. 

That fooled perhaps 8 to 10% of voters into voting No. The result was based on those promises only for some to feel that a few days later they have been sold a pup by a snake oil salesman.


----------



## NWJocko (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Of course I accept the result and the will of the Scottish people. I am also saying is that the result was gained by last minute fag packet panic measures by the London leaders of promises that they will find hard to deliver. 

That fooled perhaps 8 to 10% of voters into voting No. The result was based on those promises only for some to feel that a few days later they have been sold a pup by a snake oil salesman.
		
Click to expand...

As the No vote led in all bar 1 opinion poll in the 2 years running up to the referendum, how do you explain the No vote "being gained" by last minute actions?

Can you verify the 8-10% or is that another of your opinions....?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Of course I accept the result and the will of the Scottish people. I am also saying is that the result was gained by last minute fag packet panic measures by the London leaders of promises that they will find hard to deliver. 

That fooled perhaps 8 to 10% of voters into voting No. The result was based on those promises only for some to feel that a few days later they have been sold a pup by a snake oil salesman.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately you will never know whether the % was 8-10% or 1-2% as many who voted NO on the basis of the 'vows' given may decline to admit it.  I certainly heard interviews with undecideds who said they had decided to vote NO on basis of 'vows' and if things didn't turn out as promised then there would be another vote sometime in the future.  Maybe the interviewers were unlucky and only interviewed the few folks in Scotland who thought that way.  Quite possible.


----------



## Fish (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Of course I accept the result and the will of the Scottish people. I am also saying is that the result was gained by last minute fag packet panic measures by the London leaders of promises that they will find hard to deliver. 

That fooled perhaps 8 to 10% of voters into voting No. The result was based on those promises only for some to feel that a few days later they have been sold a pup by a snake oil salesman.
		
Click to expand...

That has to be biggest load of tosh I've read on here, your deluded!

This "fag packet" comment is also pathetic and everyone has jumped on it as they have nothing original or factual to say, its like the old saying, people who start loosing an argument revert to abuse, this is what's happening on view with those that voted yes and simply can't accept it.

I sat up and watched the votes coming in and posted them, the percentages were huge, not even marginal in most area's, even Glasgow was a surprise at how shallow the margin was and strong SNP area's also voted no, so, I think you do your countrymen no favours if you think that the tens of thousands of people in each area that voted no were duped at the last minute, its almost laughable, in-fact it is, here you go :rofl:


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Of course I accept the result and the will of the Scottish people. I am also saying is that the result was gained by last minute fag packet panic measures by the London leaders of promises that they will find hard to deliver. 

That fooled perhaps 8 to 10% of voters into voting No. The result was based on those promises only for some to feel that a few days later they have been sold a pup by a snake oil salesman.
		
Click to expand...

Polling evidence suggests the vast majority of no voters made up their mind over a year ago.

My own view is that westminster blinked too soon. I haven't voted for, nor do I particularly want, any additional powers for Holyrood and I don't believe it changed the outcome of the vote. However, they promised and now need to deliver. You, the SNP, #the45 and everyone else needs to give them the time and opportunity to do just that.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Polling evidence suggests the vast majority of no voters made up their mind over a year ago.

My own view is that westminster blinked too soon. I haven't voted for, nor do I particularly want, any additional powers for Holyrood and I don't believe it changed the outcome of the vote. However, they promised and now need to deliver. You, the SNP, #the45 and everyone else needs to give them the time and opportunity to do just that.
		
Click to expand...

Well actually 




			You, the SNP, #the45 and everyone else
		
Click to expand...

 have no choice but to wait and see.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well actually  have no choice but to wait and see.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah but it'd be nice if they stopped whining in the meantime and if the SNP government could get on with running the country since that's what they're paid for.


----------



## Val (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			.......have no choice but to wait and see.
		
Click to expand...

And a long wait at that, this won't materialise for a long long time, if ever. Can you remember the last independence referendum in Scotland?


----------



## Val (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Of course I accept the result and the will of the Scottish people. I am also saying is that the result was gained by last minute fag packet panic measures by the London leaders of promises that they will find hard to deliver. 

That fooled perhaps 8 to 10% of voters into voting No. The result was based on those promises only for some to feel that a few days later they have been sold a pup by a snake oil salesman.
		
Click to expand...

Rubbish, spoken like a bitter old man.


----------



## Kraxx68 (Sep 22, 2014)

So when will the English be able to Vote for Independence or even a divorce from Europe... as with Messer's Cameron on his plans to limit the Commons voting rights of Scottish MPs... Seems the majority does not have a say...


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 22, 2014)

Kraxx68 said:



			So when will the English be able to Vote for Independence or even a divorce from Europe... as with Messer's Cameron on his plans to limit the Commons voting rights of Scottish MPs... Seems the majority does not have a say...
		
Click to expand...

How do you know that the majority want a referendum on Europe or a devolved English parliament?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 22, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			How do you know that the majority want a referendum on Europe or a devolved English parliament?
		
Click to expand...

Doon told him.


----------



## Kraxx68 (Sep 22, 2014)

Well we won't if we can't get a vote on it...


----------



## Fish (Sep 22, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Doon told him. 

Click to expand...


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 22, 2014)

Kraxx68 said:



			Well we won't if we can't get a vote on it...
		
Click to expand...

We won't what? know? 

I don't want a referendum on Europe. I don't want a devolved English Parliament. I may be in the minority, or just maybe in the majority. I don't know, and neither do you.

 I want the current system to be tightened up and MP's made accountable. It's the scourge of modern society to claim that something isn't working and therefore requires completely changing. It doesn't.. It needs the current rules/laws enforcing..


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

Valentino said:



			And a long wait at that, this won't materialise for a long long time, if ever. Can you remember the last independence referendum in Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

Well of course there wasn't a parliament until 1997 and if I understand it correctly  the way the elections for Holyrood are set up is to defend against any one party having a majority.  But Salmond and the SNP battled their way around that particular Maginot Line and got the majority that gave them the mandate to seek the referendum.  I'm guessing that the electoral system may prevent a majority being achieved again and hence such a majority mandate may not be achievable.  

But who knows - the SNP most certainly aren't going to push through legislation preventing it happening again - and so it is up to the other parties to come together in coalition government and p;as legislation to ENSURE no one party can ever again have a majority in Holyrood.  That would shut out the SNP from every again having a majority mandate for a referendum.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 22, 2014)

[video=vimeo;100426447]http://vimeo.com/100426447[/video]

Maybe time for deep breaths and a reminder of why we love our country......


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 22, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			[video=vimeo;100426447]http://vimeo.com/100426447[/video]

Maybe time for deep breaths and a reminder of why we love our country......
		
Click to expand...


Ok Karen and Val.... Deep dark secret time... If I was Scottish, I'd have voted YES......


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 22, 2014)

Still totally gutted.


Carry on.


----------



## Val (Sep 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Still totally gutted.


Carry on.
		
Click to expand...

I know a couple who were so devastated on Friday they couldn't send their kids to school.

Neither went to work either as neither work. Tells its own story in North Lanarkshire if you ask me.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 22, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I know a couple who were so devastated on Friday they couldn't send their kids to school.

Neither went to work either as neither work. Tells its own story in North Lanarkshire if you ask me.
		
Click to expand...

I've been defriended by a yes-voting former friend on facebook. And I didn't even post anything on there, just "liked" a few things.


----------



## NWJocko (Sep 22, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			[video=vimeo;100426447]http://vimeo.com/100426447[/video]

Maybe time for deep breaths and a reminder of why we love our country......
		
Click to expand...

Very true.

The bitterness from (some of) Yes supporters is saddening to see. 

Salmond showing his true colours as a clown he is rather than the Statesmen he's pretended to be doesn't reflect well either. Typical Scotland, praise from all sides for the way the democratic process ran and instead of keeping it up, once  the response was No toys are coming out of the pram left right an centre......


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 22, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I know a couple who were so devastated on Friday they couldn't send their kids to school.

Neither went to work either as neither work. Tells its own story in North Lanarkshire if you ask me.
		
Click to expand...

Well that's pathetic. I've been in work everyday, I've subjected myself to travelling to Dumfries to watch my 'football' team lose, I played golf with my NO voting cousin and I'm playing fives with a bunch of them tonight.

Life carries on and I'm devising a plan to destroy Scottish Labour, I'll need as many allies as I can muster for that


----------



## Birchy (Sep 22, 2014)

Valentino said:



			I know a couple who were so devastated on Friday they couldn't send their kids to school.

Neither went to work either as neither work. Tells its own story in North Lanarkshire if you ask me.
		
Click to expand...

Honestly? 

Don't tell me they are going to blame it for ruining their lives now?

I bet their kids are wondering what the hell is going on.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Life carries on and I'm devising a plan to destroy Scottish Labour, I'll need as many allies as I can muster for that
		
Click to expand...

For the love of all that is holy, please don't destroy Scottish Labour. You do realize what that will do to us down here in the North of England don't you???


----------



## gregbwfc (Sep 22, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Ok Karen and Val.... Deep dark secret time... If I was Scottish, I'd have voted YES......

Click to expand...


Treacherous swine .


----------



## c1973 (Sep 22, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Doon told him. 

Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## c1973 (Sep 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Well that's pathetic. I've been in work everyday, I've subjected myself to travelling to Dumfries to watch my 'football' team lose, I played golf with my NO voting cousin and I'm playing fives with a bunch of them tonight.

Life carries on and I'm devising a plan to destroy Scottish Labour, I'll need as many allies as I can muster for that
		
Click to expand...


Settle down with a wee hauf and relax, Scottish Labour seem to be doing a decent job of destroying themselves, they don't appear to need any assistance.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

Time for a bit of Honesty all round, I am well aware that I am being slated for my views. I am not really an SNP supporter or an independent Scotland supporter. My political views would probably match those of John Smith, David Owen, David Steel and Shirley Williams.
I have rather been forced down those avenues by the total ineptitude of the modern political parties.
The SNP have made a good job of running a devolved Scotland, I think most sensible folk can see that. That is why they earned my vote.

Now regarding the honesty and the 'heckling' of Yes supporters on her......imagine...for one wee moment if the Yes had pulled off a victory.......what would you NO guys and gals be saying on here. Be honest now.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Very true.

The bitterness from (some of) Yes supporters is saddening to see. 

Salmond showing his true colours as a clown he is rather than the Statesmen he's pretended to be doesn't reflect well either. Typical Scotland, praise from all sides for the way the democratic process ran and instead of keeping it up, once  the response was No toys are coming out of the pram left right an centre......
		
Click to expand...

It's very sad to see that some people can't accept their country has spoken

Over on Facebook they have going about a group that has been started called the "45" 

Some of the posts are truely laughable 

Demanding recounts and suggesting it was fixed etc etc 

So much bitterness


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Time for a bit of Honesty all round, I am well aware that I am being slated for my views. I am not really an SNP supporter or an independent Scotland supporter. My political views would probably match those of John Smith, David Owen, David Steel and Shirley Williams.
I have rather been forced down those avenues by the total ineptitude of the modern political parties.
The SNP have made a good job of running a devolved Scotland, I think most sensible folk can see that. That is why they earned my vote.

Now regarding the honesty and the 'heckling' of Yes supporters on her......imagine...for one wee moment if the Yes had pulled off a victory.......*what would you NO guys and gals be saying on here. Be honest now.*

Click to expand...

Well I expect they would be saying good luck and getting on with life and helping make an Independant Scotland 

They wouldn't be acting like a spoilt child who was refused some sweets


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			For the love of all that is holy, please don't destroy Scottish Labour. You do realize what that will do to us down here in the North of England don't you???
		
Click to expand...

Tory Westminster government for ever and a day?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Well I expect they would be saying good luck and getting on with life and helping make an Independant Scotland 

They wouldn't be acting like a spoilt child who was refused some sweets
		
Click to expand...


Sorry, but I doubt that very much Phil.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It's very sad to see that some people can't accept their country has spoken

Over on Facebook they have going about a group that has been started called the "45" 

Some of the posts are truely laughable 

Demanding recounts and suggesting it was fixed etc etc 

So much bitterness
		
Click to expand...

You need to understand if you can how so much of the Scottish identity and social and cultural landscape has for about 100yrs and more been built upon the notion of a nation sold for gold becoming 'free' again.  And when given the opportunity we have said No Thanks.  I can understand how so many of my fellow Scots will find that very difficult to adjust to.  One of the reasons I rather hoped Scotland would vote YES would be to avoid that and the 'fall-out' that has indeed in full swing.  And as much as you might weary of the noises North and want Scots to just shut up and get on with it - well that's a bit like telling a manic depressive alcoholic to cheer up and stop drinking.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You need to understand if you can how so much of the Scottish identity and social and cultural landscape has for about 100yrs and more been built upon the notion of a nation sold for gold becoming 'free' again.  And when given the opportunity we have said No Thanks.  I can understand how so many of my fellow Scots will find that very difficult to adjust to.  One of the reasons I rather hoped Scotland would vote YES would be to avoid that and the 'fall-out' that has indeed in full swing.  And as much as you might weary of the noises North and want Scots to just shut up and get on with it - well that's a bit like telling a manic depressive alcoholic to cheer up and stop drinking.
		
Click to expand...

A new low even for you. What complete and absolute nonsense!!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Sorry, but I doubt that very much Phil.
		
Click to expand...

Why do you doubt that ? 

Yes wer the vocal ones , yes were the ones in people's faces , yes were the ones with the forceful message 

No people were very quiet and dignified - 

Yes have thrown their teddies out of the cot and continue to do so.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

ger147 said:



			A new low even for you. What complete and absolute nonsense!!
		
Click to expand...

What?  A low?  What are you on about, You might not but a lot do - I never said everyone.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You need to understand if you can how so much of the Scottish identity and social and cultural landscape has for about 100yrs and more been built upon the notion of a nation sold for gold becoming 'free' again.  And when given the opportunity we have said No Thanks.  I can understand how so many of my fellow Scots will find that very difficult to adjust to.  One of the reasons I rather hoped Scotland would vote YES would be to avoid that and the 'fall-out' that has indeed in full swing.  And as much as you might weary of the noises North and want Scots to just shut up and get on with it - well that's a bit like telling a manic depressive alcoholic to cheer up and stop drinking.
		
Click to expand...

That's just a blob of nonsense


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			That's just a blob of nonsense
		
Click to expand...

Like you'd know - you know how Scots think do you?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Like you'd know - you know how Scots think do you?
		
Click to expand...

You have generalised a whole nation ( a nation you don't live in )!

It maybe how you think but don't judge everyone on how you think


----------



## ger147 (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Like you'd know - you know how Scots think do you?
		
Click to expand...

I think I might just have literally pissed my pants!!

Talk about the pot and the kettle...


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 22, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			For the love of all that is holy, please don't destroy Scottish Labour. You do realize what that will do to us down here in the North of England don't you???
		
Click to expand...

Ha! I think Labour are close to destroying themselves in England too...refusal to back more English only voting at Westminster ( I think there should be btw) will result in a backlash in May south of the border.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You have generalised a whole nation 

It maybe how you think but don't judge everyone on how you think
		
Click to expand...

No I didn't - I was very specific.  I said 'much' not 'all' of Scottish identity and I said 'many' Scots and again not 'all'.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 22, 2014)

ger147 said:



			I think I might just have literally pissed my pants!!

Talk about the pot and the kettle...
		
Click to expand...

Explain...please.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Sep 22, 2014)

SNP now 3rd largest political party in The UK now.

This might be a stretch, but consider:

GE May 2015

Closely fought battle in England between Labour/Tories, UKIP get a couple of MP's, Scotland sends 40 odd SNP MPs to Westminster in protest to Labour.

SNP could, in theory be the party to form a collation govt at Westminster!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Ha! I think Labour are close to destroying themselves in England too...refusal to back more English only voting at Westminster ( I think there should be btw) will result in a backlash in May south of the border.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, Cameron has outfoxed them for sure.


----------



## ger147 (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Explain...please.
		
Click to expand...

None required.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why do you doubt that ? 

Yes wer the vocal ones , yes were the ones in people's faces , yes were the ones with the forceful message 

No people were very quiet and dignified - 

Yes have thrown their teddies out of the cot and continue to do so.
		
Click to expand...

How do you know that Phil....by watching the telly and reading the newspapers....yea?

Quiet and dignified ...........not where I live. It was completely the opposite from what you say.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No I didn't - I was very specific.  I said 'much' not 'all' of Scottish identity and I said 'many' Scots and again not 'all'.
		
Click to expand...


Much ?! many ?! 

Generic statements or meaningless 

How do you know how "many" or "much" feel - have you asked them ? 

Your nation had the choice - that choice has been made - either cry about it and act like a child who didn't get the bike for Xmas or look forward to how the country can move forward together with more powers 

So much bitterness flying around at the moment 

The fact some are trying to suggest ways to make the vote null and void is laughable


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			How do you know that Phil....by watching the telly and reading the newspapers....yea?

Quiet and dignified ...........not where I live. It was completely the opposite from what you say.
		
Click to expand...


By listening to debates , by watching the telly , reading papers , social media , listening to the radio - speaking to friends 

The Yes were very very vocal


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Time for a bit of Honesty all round, I am well aware that I am being slated for my views. I am not really an SNP supporter or an independent Scotland supporter. My political views would probably match those of John Smith, David Owen, David Steel and Shirley Williams.
I have rather been forced down those avenues by the total ineptitude of the modern political parties.
The SNP have made a good job of running a devolved Scotland, I think most sensible folk can see that. That is why they earned my vote.

Now regarding the honesty and the 'heckling' of Yes supporters on her......imagine...for one wee moment if the Yes had pulled off a victory.......what would you NO guys and gals be saying on here. Be honest now.
		
Click to expand...

I'd have been pretty depressed by the narrow-mindedness of my fellow scots, might have mumped a bit about SNP lies I suppose, but would have stated that I'd been convinced that independence wasn't going to be an economic disaster and that I'd respect the result and try to play my part in making a success of it.


----------



## NWJocko (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			How do you know that Phil....by watching the telly and reading the newspapers....yea?

Quiet and dignified ...........not where I live. It was completely the opposite from what you say.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe in your village DfT but, from speaking to friends on a daily basis and observing on social media, Yes we're very much the "loud" presence in the debate. They continue to be with "traitor/feart/coward" etc thrown at anyone outside "#clan45"....


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Maybe in your village DfT but, from speaking to friends on a daily basis and observing on social media, Yes we're very much the "loud" presence in the debate. They continue to be with "traitor/feart/coward" etc thrown at anyone outside "#clan45"....
		
Click to expand...

My carers allow me out of my village occasionally, even to the big cities:lol:

I never witnessed any poor behaviour from Yes supporters....they were vocal....but never out of order.

One of my neighbours who works in Glasgow had his expensive car 'keyed'. He was daft enough to display Yes stickers
He does not know where it happened


----------



## c1973 (Sep 22, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			You need to understand if you can how so much of the Scottish identity and social and cultural landscape has for about 100yrs and more been built upon the notion of a nation sold for gold becoming 'free' again.  And when given the opportunity we have said No Thanks.  I can understand how so many of my fellow Scots will find that very difficult to adjust to.  One of the reasons *I rather hoped Scotland would vote YES would be to avoid that and the 'fall-out' that has indeed in full swing.*  And as much as you might weary of the noises North and want Scots to just shut up and get on with it - well that's a bit like telling a manic depressive alcoholic to cheer up and stop drinking.
		
Click to expand...


Oh dear. Let me get this straight, are you saying if it was a yes vote everyone would have accepted it and there would have been no fall out?  

Although some Scots might share your view, it would appear that most Scots cultural and social landscape is entwined with the UK and not in some tartan and shortbread braveheart utopian nonsense. Now, whether anyone disagrees or refuses to accept that is up to them, but the referendum kinda showed that to be the case. 

Some of us Scots can actually look forward and not hold some outdated grudge about a parcel o rogues in a nation. Bear in mind that the parcel of rogues that 'allegedly' shafted the nation were Scottish (some Normans, possibly Danes and Irish blood in their too mind). I'd say we have just narrowly avoided a parcel o rogues screwing the country so badly we would be back, cap in hand, rather sharpish (just my opinion though).

We all have our point of view though, however ludicrous it may appear to some, and you are most certainly entitled to yours.


----------



## c1973 (Sep 22, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Maybe in your village DfT but, from speaking to friends on a daily basis and observing on social media, Yes we're very much the "loud" presence in the debate. They continue to be with "traitor/feart/coward" etc thrown at anyone outside "#clan45"....
		
Click to expand...


Is the correct answer. No were certainly less in your face, from all I have witnessed up here.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 22, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Ha! I think Labour are close to destroying themselves in England too...refusal to back more English only voting at Westminster ( I think there should be btw) will result in a backlash in May south of the border.
		
Click to expand...

Taking a wider view, and forgetting for a moment that Cameron is largely a moron, it would appear that he is about to do something so politically impressive and diabolical, that his Heroine Maggie herself could never even have contemplated!! He's about to destroy Labour and ensure a a Tory majority for the next 30 years!! The guy should be accompanied by the Imperial March every time he walks into the room.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Well I expect they would be saying good luck and getting on with life and helping make an Independant Scotland 

They wouldn't be acting like a spoilt child who was refused some sweets
		
Click to expand...

Er. I beg to differ!

http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/p...-square-in-glasgow-following-confront#1vxo3n8

If that's what they were like after a victory, the pram would have been well and truly destroyed - imo!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Taking a wider view, and forgetting for a moment that Cameron is largely a moron, it would appear that he is about to do something so politically impressive and diabolical, that his Heroine Maggie herself could never even have contemplated!! He's about to destroy Labour and ensure a a Tory majority for the next 30 years!! The guy should be accompanied by the Imperial March every time he walks into the room.
		
Click to expand...

You have to admire him as he was a couple of days away from resigning, what is it they say about a week in politics.
It was pretty funny watching the faces and body language of the politicians from both sides of the divide when they had to work together.
George Galloway sharing the same platform with Ruth Davidson [Scots Tory Leader for the English /Scots experts] was very funny.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Er. I beg to differ!

http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/p...-square-in-glasgow-following-confront#1vxo3n8

If that's what they were like after a victory, the pram would have been well and truly destroyed - imo!
		
Click to expand...

And judging by the reaction of some yes campaigners I have a feeling there would have been a lot more gloating and a lot more trouble


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			You have to admire him as he was a couple of days away from resigning, what is it they say about a week in politics.
It was pretty funny watching the faces and body language of the politicians from both sides of the divide when they had to work together.
George Galloway sharing the same platform with Ruth Davidson [Scots Tory Leader for the English /Scots experts] was very funny.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but you keep posting these unfounded and statements plucked from thin air but couple days from resigning ?!


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Sorry but you keep posting these unfounded and statements plucked from thin air but couple days from resigning ?!
		
Click to expand...

Cameron would have most likely been forced to resign if the YES vote had won. As it stands now, he's about to become the Tories new poster boy and lead them into a New Age of Power.. God help the poor and disadvantaged now...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

I am so impressed with the way Cameron has handled himself that I might even vote Tory at the next election. Marginal seat as well.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I am so impressed with the way Cameron has handled himself that I might even vote Tory at the next election. Marginal seat as well.
		
Click to expand...

Is this a new ploy by the #45? All vote Toryboy and destroy Northern England?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And judging by the reaction of some yes campaigners I have a feeling there would have been a lot more gloating and a lot more trouble
		
Click to expand...

How do you know that?
Provide me with evidence of your statement.
Are you able to foresee future events before they happen?
Do you just make up things to support your views?

Etc etc etc.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Is this a new ploy by the #45? All vote Toryboy and destroy Northern England? 

Click to expand...

Thanks ......never thought of that, I'll have a word with the other 44 :lol:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			How do you know that?
Provide me with evidence of your statement.
Are you able to foresee future events before they happen?
Do you just make up things to support your views?

Etc etc etc.
		
Click to expand...

There is a few things that should give you a clue 

It was a feeling as opposed to anything concrete 

And you are proving a perfect example with your reactions - null and void vote the crowning glory


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Is this a new ploy by the #45? All vote Toryboy and destroy Northern England? 

Click to expand...


One of the #45 wanted the border of Scotland lowered to include the North of England - suppose that would destroy it


----------



## Fish (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			How do you know that?
Provide me with evidence of your statement.
Are you able to foresee future events before they happen?
Do you just make up things to support your views?

Etc etc etc.
		
Click to expand...

Are you looking in a mirror and asking yourself this :smirk:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

Fish said:



			Are you looking in a mirror and asking yourself this :smirk:
		
Click to expand...

They don't like it up them Jonesy:smirk:

Notice......... he did not even answer one of my questions


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They don't like it up them Jonesy:smirk:

Notice......... he did not even answer one of my questions
		
Click to expand...

I'll make you a deal - I'll answer all those questions once you go through the thread and answer every single question you avoided on here :thup:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I'll make you a deal - I'll answer all those questions once you go through the thread and answer every single question you avoided on here :thup:
		
Click to expand...

deflect deflect deflect once again, avoid the questions you can't possibly answer.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			deflect deflect deflect once again, avoid the questions you can't possibly answer.
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			How do you know that? -* It was a gut feeling *
Provide me with evidence of your statement. *you are my evidence*
Are you able to foresee future events before they happen? - *nope *
Do you just make up things to support your views?* Nope *

Etc etc etc.
		
Click to expand...

Your turn to answer all the questions you have avoided


----------



## Val (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Time for a bit of Honesty all round, I am well aware that I am being slated for my views. I am not really an SNP supporter or an independent Scotland supporter. My political views would probably match those of John Smith, David Owen, David Steel and Shirley Williams.
I have rather been forced down those avenues by the total ineptitude of the modern political parties.
The SNP have made a good job of running a devolved Scotland, I think most sensible folk can see that. That is why they earned my vote.

Now regarding the honesty and the 'heckling' of Yes supporters on her......imagine...for one wee moment if the Yes had pulled off a victory.......what would you NO guys and gals be saying on here. Be honest now.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting, here's me thinking it was about independence not any party? So are you saying you are now a nationalist and agree with their policies or do you just want independence which is completely different.



FairwayDodger said:



			I'd have been pretty depressed by the narrow-mindedness of my fellow scots, might have mumped a bit about SNP lies I suppose, but would have stated that I'd been convinced that independence wasn't going to be an economic disaster and that I'd respect the result and try to play my part in making a success of it.
		
Click to expand...

Likewise, I'd have been majorly disappointed however I'd have got on with it, I have bills to pay so I would have had no option but to deal with it.



Doon frae Troon said:



			deflect deflect deflect once again, avoid the questions you can't possibly answer.
		
Click to expand...

Wow, what a major pot a kettle statement, I'm unsure if you ever answered any question posed to you straight on this thread.


----------



## c1973 (Sep 22, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Interesting, here's me thinking it was about independence not any party? So are you saying you are now a nationalist and agree with their policies or do you just want independence which is completely different.
		
Click to expand...

What I can't understand is where he states he is 'Not really an snp supporter or an independent Scotland supporter'  but stated previously he was a yes supporter/voter. 

I can't work that one out at all. If your not a supporter of an independent Scotland why in God's good name would you vote for it? Absolutely baffling comment that.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Interesting, here's me thinking it was about independence not any party? So are you saying you are now a nationalist and agree with their policies or do you just want independence which is completely different.
		
Click to expand...

My first post on this thread was in support of a Scottish 'Conservative' blogger.
I then supported Devo Max but that was not on the table until after I had cast my postal vote, slightly miffed about that.
As the debate developed it was easy to see that the London parties were pretty clueless about the main priorities of an Independent Scotland and some of the guff spewed out by the media was totally flawed.
eg Scaring Scottish pensioners that they would have their pensions devalued and an Independent Scotland would not be able to pay them. Did you notice that it was NOT a politician who corrected the fact that it was the UK government that had to honour those pensions. Damage was done though and many oldies voted NO to 'save' their pensions.
After that I thought if the existing London leaders can tell us bare faced lies we would probably be better off on or own. I know Salmond can streatch a point but I don't think even he would drop to that kind of standard.

So
 a] I would have preferred to vote NO if Devo Max had been offered. and b] I am not a natural SNP supporter but their is no other sensible Scottish option other than not voting.


----------



## Val (Sep 22, 2014)

c1973 said:



			What I can't understand is where he states he is 'Not really an snp supporter or an independent Scotland supporter'  but stated previously he was a yes supporter/voter. 

I can't work that one out at all. If your not a supporter of an independent Scotland why in God's good name would you vote for it? Absolutely baffling comment that.
		
Click to expand...

Like most of his posts on this thread, shot from the hip with no chain of thought then ignore the questions asked.


----------



## NWJocko (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			My first post on this thread was in support of a Scottish 'Conservative' blogger.
I then supported Devo Max but that was not on the table until after I had cast my postal vote, slightly miffed about that.
As the debate developed it was easy to see that the London parties were pretty clueless about the main priorities of an Independent Scotland and some of the guff spewed out by the media was totally flawed.
eg Scaring Scottish pensioners that they would have their pensions devalued and an Independent Scotland would not be able to pay them. Did you notice that it was NOT a politician who corrected the fact that it was the UK government that had to honour those pensions. Damage was done though and many oldies voted NO to 'save' their pensions.
After that I thought if the existing London leaders can tell us bare faced lies we would probably be better off on or own. I know Salmond can streatch a point but I don't think even he would drop to that kind of standard.

So
 a] I would have preferred to vote NO if Devo Max had been offered. and b] I am not a natural SNP supporter but their is no other sensible Scottish option other than not voting.
		
Click to expand...

Salmond said last week this was a once in a generation chance at independence and he would accept the result.

Today he says that the SNP can ignore the democratic process and declare independence with a sufficient majority in Holyrood.

All politicians tell bare faced lies.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Like most of his posts on this thread, shot from the hip with no chain of thought then ignore the questions asked.
		
Click to expand...

I beg you pardon, could you guys please try to be a bit more civilised.
I have tried to answer any questions posed, perhaps you can remind me of the ones I have missed.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Salmond said last week this was a once in a generation chance at independence and he would accept the result.

Today he says that the SNP can ignore the democratic process and declare independence with a sufficient majority in Holyrood.

All politicians tell bare faced lies.
		
Click to expand...

I think he is a wee bit upset. He has spent 40 years chasing his dream.

BTW I think any country/region can declare a UDI at anytime.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Sep 22, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			Salmond said last week this was a once in a generation chance at independence and he would accept the result.
*All politicians tell bare faced lies*.
		
Click to expand...

Not 100% accurate. Throughout the campaign Alec Salmond said that after the vote Scotland would still be in the EU and would keep the pound. And fair play to him, the results are in and Scotland are still in the EU and do still have the pound.


----------



## Val (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I beg you pardon, could you guys please try to be a bit more civilised.
I have tried to answer any questions posed, perhaps you can remind me of the ones I have missed.
		
Click to expand...

If I had time I'd trawl through and find them but recently I asked you on 3 occasions why you were so sure an iScotland would ditch the BBC and you never furnished the thread with an answer, maybe it was just my questions you dodged but you dodged plenty.

As for being civilised, where am I not being civilised?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 22, 2014)

Valentino said:



			If I had time I'd trawl through and find them but recently I asked you on 3 occasions why you were so sure an iScotland would ditch the BBC and you never furnished the thread with an answer, maybe it was just my questions you dodged but you dodged plenty.

As for being civilised, where am I not being civilised?
		
Click to expand...

I think the BBC thing is in the White Paper. I remember reading about using existing BBC facilities to create a SBC and buy in BBC programmes when required
I assumed that it was common knowledge.

Civilised/last post was pretty rude, may be true :lol: but is was also rude.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I beg you pardon, could you guys please try to be a bit more civilised.
I have tried to answer any questions posed, perhaps you can remind me of the ones I have missed.
		
Click to expand...

You must be joking - you have spent most of the thread avoiding any question put to you after you post something utterly ridiculous 

I'm struggling to decide which was the most ridiculous 

Reckon the one suggesting the Scottish Border be moved further South to include the north of England - that was the cherry on top


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You must be joking - you have spent most of the thread avoiding any question put to you after you post something utterly ridiculous 

I'm struggling to decide which was the most ridiculous 

Reckon the one suggesting the Scottish Border be moved further South to include the north of England - that was the cherry on top
		
Click to expand...

I think he was joking about moving the border.
 But in England, is it true the further north you get from Westminster there's  increasing feelings of being treated as 2nd class citizens and discontentment with the powers that be ???.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 22, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Reckon the one suggesting the Scottish Border be moved further South to include the north of England - that was the cherry on top
		
Click to expand...

I suspect that was a joke, and it's one I have heard a few times from people who are concerned about the effect that Scottish Independence would have on the North of England (not that I'm labouring a point here). 

More than one person I know has stated that they would have considered moving to Scotland had the vote gone in favour of YES.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 22, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			I think he was joking about moving the border.
 But in England, is it true the further north you get from Westminster there's  increasing feelings of being treated as 2nd class citizens and discontentment with the powers that be ???.
		
Click to expand...

See my post above. I wrote it whilst you were composing yours..


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 22, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			I think he was joking about moving the border.
 But in England, is it true the further north you get from Westminster there's  increasing feelings of being treated as 2nd class citizens and discontentment with the powers that be ???.
		
Click to expand...

I wouldn't rule out people in London feeling that discontent towards the government 

I can't remember the last time didn't have issues with the government


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 23, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			I suspect that was a joke, and it's one I have heard a few times from people who are concerned about the effect that Scottish Independence would have on the North of England (not that I'm labouring a point here). 

More than one person I know has stated that they would have considered moving to Scotland had the vote gone in favour of YES.
		
Click to expand...

So DFTs idea about moving the border a bit to the south might be a good idea :rofl:


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 23, 2014)

williamalex1 said:



			So DFTs idea about moving the border a bit to the south might be a good idea :rofl:
		
Click to expand...

Maybe we should have a referendum?


----------



## williamalex1 (Sep 23, 2014)

bluewolf said:



			Maybe we should have a referendum? 

Click to expand...

Wish i'd thought of that  lets start a thread.:rofl:


----------



## Val (Sep 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think the BBC thing is in the White Paper. I remember reading about using existing BBC facilities to create a SBC and buy in BBC programmes when required
I assumed that it was common knowledge.

Civilised/last post was pretty rude, may be true :lol: but is was also rude.
		
Click to expand...

White paper/common knowledge or not, you ignored the question on more than 1 occasion, that is more rude than me pointing the truth out to you. 

My post wasn't rude, blunt possibly but not rude.


----------



## Hobbit (Sep 23, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Wow, what a major pot a kettle statement, I'm unsure if you ever answered any question posed to you straight on this thread.
		
Click to expand...

You're unsure?



Doon frae Troon said:



			I beg you pardon, could you guys please try to be a bit more civilised.
I have tried to answer any questions posed, perhaps you can remind me of the ones I have missed.
		
Click to expand...

I know you ignored a number of questions I posed to you. And I've just had a brief skim through the thread, and found you ignored a number of questions posed by a number of posters. I think the spin you put on a number of facts, and your blinkered attitude did more for NO than YES.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 23, 2014)

[QUOTE
I know you ignored a number of questions I posed to you. And I've just had a brief skim through the thread, and found you ignored a number of questions posed by a number of posters. I think the spin you put on a number of facts, and your blinkered attitude did more for NO than YES.[/QUOTE]

Can you please post them so I can reply. [or not]
As I said I have tried to reply to each post, any that was rude and included a personal insult or, in the BBC case, I presumed was common knowledge I may not have wasted my time. I understand now that what was common knowledge in Scotland may not be the case South of Watford.
A few, like the Scottish border issue were said tongue in cheek I can't believe some folk took it literally.
Mind you, having spent a few days walking in the North of England  a few locals wished Scotland good luck and said that they wished they could join us.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 23, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Much ?! many ?! 

Generic statements or meaningless 

How do you know how "many" or "much" feel - have you asked them ? 

Your nation had the choice - that choice has been made - either cry about it and act like a child who didn't get the bike for Xmas or look forward to how the country can move forward together with more powers 

So much bitterness flying around at the moment 

The fact some are trying to suggest ways to make the vote null and void is laughable
		
Click to expand...

Well no bitterness from me.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 23, 2014)

ger147 said:



			None required.
		
Click to expand...

thought you'd decline - which is OK.  Doesn't bother me.


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 23, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And judging by the reaction of some yes campaigners I have a feeling there would have been a lot more gloating and a lot more trouble
		
Click to expand...

After the 'shock horror' of the reaction to the Balotelli tweet, the 'No' campaigners appear to have been similarly 'vile' (a Scots Police description) of Andy Murray's one!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29323123

Idiots everywhere is my conclusion - and high profile folk need to recognise that and 'temper' their activity accordingly!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			How do you know that?
Provide me with evidence of your statement.
Are you able to foresee future events before they happen?
Do you just make up things to support your views?

Etc etc etc.
		
Click to expand...

touche DfT


----------



## Val (Sep 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			As I said I have tried to reply to each post, any that was rude and included a personal insult or, in the BBC case, I presumed was common knowledge I may not have wasted my time.
		
Click to expand...

You THINK it was in the white paper, well it wasn't. The white paper stated it would become the SBS in Scotland using BBC Scotlands assets using Scottish licence payers money. So BBC Scotland in all but name.

I asked the question of your opinion 3 times and it was ignored. 

Going back just this month for question's and retorts to you which got no response, i've found 2 examples that I asked, now given this thread has been running since January I wont be going back but I can assure you its been a common theme of yours.

Economy 3rd Sept







			For many years Scotland has had a positive balance of payments, we export far more than we import.
A large percentage of our imports are from England
		
Click to expand...

So why did/is our economy grow/growing at a slower rate than that of the UK?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...iness-27048036

If you are going to post nonsense as fact at least back it up with something.
		
Click to expand...

Pound Value







			think the drop in the pound value is more to do with the long term problems that England will have to face without the additional off set from Scotland's balance of payments surplus. Not much to do with Scotland at all.
		
Click to expand...

Go read that contradiction again. How can it be nothing to so with Scotland if it's Scotland that's affecting it?
		
Click to expand...


----------



## CMAC (Sep 23, 2014)

Val- I applaud you trying to get an answer- but he is lighting fuses all over this thread and two others. 

I'm sure theres a name for people that do that on forums


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 23, 2014)

In 'defence' of DFT...that's something I didn't expect to be doing!

Your statement about what was in the White Paper seems to answer your own question!

Neither of the other 2 'comments' were really actually questions! Certainly the 1st wasn't, and a reply to the 2nd would only have been a repeat of the first sentence!

I'm making no comment on the validity of the statements/opinions either way btw, just can't see why a reply to either was considered necessary/avoided.


----------



## c1973 (Sep 23, 2014)

Quote Originally Posted by Doon frae Troon  View Post
deflect deflect deflect once again, avoid the questions you can't possibly answer.
Quote Originally Posted by Doon frae Troon  View Post
*How do you know that? - It was a gut feeling 
Provide me with evidence of your statement. you are my evidence
Are you able to foresee future events before they happen? - nope 
Do you just make up things to support your views? Nope 
*
Etc etc etc.
Your turn to answer all the questions you have avoided



SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			touche DfT 

Click to expand...

It would appear he answered DFTs questions and is still waiting on answers from DFT for the many questions put to him he chose to ignore, or possibly never noticed, on the thread.

Touche Liverpoolphil 


Avoiding answering questions on various matters was (imo) one of the main reasons yes were defeated. I realise that's how politicians operate, but this was too big an issue for that tactic to work (again, imo).


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 23, 2014)

c1973 said:



			....
Avoiding answering questions on various matters was (imo) one of the main reasons yes were defeated. I realise that's how politicians operate, but this was too big an issue for that tactic to work (again, imo).
		
Click to expand...

I agree! However, I believe the 'strategy' was to avoid getting bogged down in the detail of the 'final product' and the transition - as answering those questions would always put the 'Yes' on the defensive. Possibly an error not to have provided some expansion/options though and actually provided an environment where ridiculous claims of the danger of Independence could also be made.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Sep 23, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			In 'defence' of DFT...that's something I didn't expect to be doing!

Your statement about what was in the White Paper seems to answer your own question!

Neither of the other 2 'comments' were really actually questions! Certainly the 1st wasn't, and a reply to the 2nd would only have been a repeat of the first sentence!

I'm making no comment on the validity of the statements/opinions either way btw, just can't see why a reply to either was considered necessary/avoided.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you Foxholer.......I am out of here now as I find some of the 'robust' comments rude and bullying.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Thank you Foxholer.......I am out of here now as I find some of the 'robust' comments rude and bullying.
		
Click to expand...

What about the questions Val put to you ?


----------



## Val (Sep 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Thank you Foxholer.......I am out of here now as I find some of the 'robust' comments rude and bullying.
		
Click to expand...

Outrageous, the questions and opinions on this thread would always be robust, you weren't shy of being opinionated yourself but you couldn't back any up why challenged and swerved many valid points asked.


----------



## Val (Sep 23, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			In 'defence' of DFT...that's something I didn't expect to be doing!

Your statement about what was in the White Paper seems to answer your own question!

Neither of the other 2 'comments' were really actually questions! Certainly the 1st wasn't, and a reply to the 2nd would only have been a repeat of the first sentence!

I'm making no comment on the validity of the statements/opinions either way btw, just can't see why a reply to either was considered necessary/avoided.
		
Click to expand...

Nonsense, all were questions.

1 - What makes you think that the BBC will be ditched? Valid question to a post from DFT, I questioned his opinion.

2 - So why did/is our economy grow/growing at a slower rate than that of the UK? Valid question to a post from DFT.

3 - How can it be nothing to so with Scotland if it's Scotland that's affecting it? Again another valid question.

How can you defend that?


----------



## Foxholer (Sep 23, 2014)

Valentino said:



			Nonsense, all were questions.

1 - What makes you think that the BBC will be ditched? Valid question to a post from DFT, I questioned his opinion.

2 - So why did/is our economy grow/growing at a slower rate than that of the UK? Valid question to a post from DFT.

3 - How can it be nothing to so with Scotland if it's Scotland that's affecting it? Again another valid question.

How can you defend that?
		
Click to expand...

Easily - as per my 3rd para!

Remember, I make no judgement on the validity of the opinions - neither his (unsubstantiated?) one, nor yours that included 1 example that countered his.


----------



## c1973 (Sep 23, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Thank you Foxholer.......I am out of here now as I find some of the 'robust' comments rude and bullying.
		
Click to expand...


Genuine apologies if you feel any of my comments were bullying you. If that line was crossed then it wasn't my intention to do so. 

That being said, you can come across as being opinionated (not saying that's bad btw) and in my experience folks like that can usually deal with a more robust debate. It has been (mostly) a good natured debate you have started with as much nonsense as there is well thought out posts, be a shame to bail out on your own thread.


----------



## Fish (Sep 23, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Genuine apologies if you feel any of my comments were bullying you. If that line was crossed then it wasn't my intention to do so. 

That being said, you can come across as being opinionated (not saying that's bad btw) and in my experience folks like that can usually deal with a more robust debate. It has been (mostly) a good natured debate you have started with as much nonsense as there is well thought out posts, be a shame to bail out on your own thread.
		
Click to expand...

I think its just a case of...


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 23, 2014)

Bullying - battle cry of the Yes campaign. :lol: Love it, it's the internet FFS, nobody gets hurt.


----------



## c1973 (Sep 23, 2014)

Fish said:



			I think its just a case of...

View attachment 12376

Click to expand...

Hmm, that looks like a silver cross pram, those wheels made great bogies (cartie, go kart) and were much sought after when I was a youngster.  

Ah, the toys oot the pram............

Yeah, on reflection you're probably correct.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 23, 2014)

No - some comments have been downright rude


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 23, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No - some comments have been downright rude
		
Click to expand...


Tbh I haven't really seen these "rude" comments or is it a case of being a little over sensitive 

Can you highlight some examples?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 25, 2014)

If you have a look back yourself on responses by a few to some posts made by myself and DfT (in particular) you should notice how some are rude in that they are dismissive, scornful and rather snidey.  If you don't find any so be it - I'm not going to point you to any - you should be able to spot them quite easily yourself.

But hey - the world moves on and I'm not really that bothered - it was just a bit disappointing,


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 25, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I don't know.  BT and Cameron just says it's better for the union - as well as Scotland.



BT are saying 'Scotland gets best of both worlds if Scotland votes NO'  What's you question again - sorry...

I'm not sure that a 'vote NO for a 'best of both worlds' and keep things are they are' is something many folks down south are going to be completely happy with.  Unless that is changes happen down south to bring England closer to Scotland in respect of tuition fees, prescriptions etc and the per head central government grant.  But for as much as I can't see the Tories addressing the former (tuition fees etc) - I can see them looking to revise the central government (Westminster) grant to Holyrood - and I can;t see it getting revised upwards.
		
Click to expand...

From 27th January I was thinking that down here in England following a NO, voters in England wouldn't be happy with the status quo on funding - to be told that this wasn't really an issue down here for most folks - well funnily enough it seems to be an issue now.


----------



## Old Skier (Sep 26, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			- to be told that this wasn't really an issue down here for most folks - well funnily enough it seems to be an issue now.
		
Click to expand...

Well if your mates down the pub said it wasn't going to be an issue they were pulling your plonker.  This has always been an issue long before the Independence vote.  The only thing the UK people want to see is fairness.  If it is fair then the political class need to explain why.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 26, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Well if your mates down the pub said it wasn't going to be an issue they were pulling your plonker.  This has always been an issue long before the Independence vote.  The only thing the UK people want to see is fairness.  If it is fair then the political class need to explain why.
		
Click to expand...

My mates in the pub and in the club were telling me it was an issue -  some here didn't.  So when BT were giving their 'best of both worlds' stuff if a NO - saying nothing would change all along I said that a NO would not give the status quo and the English electorate wouldn't stand for the current situation.  They'd say You vote to stay in the UK then you get funded the same as the rest of the UK.  And so it has come to pass. And all nice and messily tangled up with the English votes on English matters.

Going to be interesting seeing the government untangle what Cameron tangled at 7am on the 19th.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 1, 2014)

_A Â£2.6 billion contract has secured 1,500 jobs at the Clyde naval base which is home to the UK's nuclear deterrent, the Defence Secretary (has) said_

Hmmm - didn't appreciate that they were ever at risk.  Was there ever a possibility that the government would stop maintenance work on the subs at Faslane?  Don't think so.  Expensive job support scheme though at Â£1m+ a throw.


----------



## AlexDarling (Oct 1, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



_A Â£2.6 billion contract has secured 1,500 jobs at the Clyde naval base which is home to the UK's nuclear deterrent, the Defence Secretary (has) said_

Hmmm - *didn't appreciate that they were ever at risk.*  Was there ever a possibility that *the government would stop maintenance work on the subs at Faslane?  Don't think so.*  Expensive job support scheme though at Â£1m+ a throw.
		
Click to expand...

the govt policy is very clear about defence work only being carried out in this *United* Kingdom so I'm not sure why you think the above.


----------



## Foxholer (Oct 1, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



_A Â£2.6 billion contract has secured 1,500 jobs at the Clyde naval base which is home to the UK's nuclear deterrent, the Defence Secretary (has) said_

Hmmm - didn't appreciate that they were ever at risk.  Was there ever a possibility that the government would stop maintenance work on the subs at Faslane?  Don't think so.  Expensive job support scheme though at Â£1m+ a throw.
		
Click to expand...

Well they'd certainly have been 'at risk' if the sub base had been chucked out of (an independent) Scotland!

And I would expect hardware would be the major costs in that contract, not the 1500 jobs.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well they'd certainly have been 'at risk' if the sub base had been chucked out of (an independent) Scotland!
		
Click to expand...

Yes - but it hasn't been - so the jobs have not been at risk since September 19th.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 1, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Yes - but it hasn't been - so the jobs have not been at risk since September 19th.
		
Click to expand...

true,true.


----------



## Old Skier (Oct 1, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



_A Â£2.6 billion contract has secured 1,500 jobs at the Clyde naval base which is home to the UK's nuclear deterrent, the Defence Secretary (has) said_

Hmmm - didn't appreciate that they were ever at risk.  Was there ever a possibility that the government would stop maintenance work on the subs at Faslane?  Don't think so.  Expensive job support scheme though at Â£1m+ a throw.
		
Click to expand...

Did you read any of this thread.  The bit where iscot was going to chuck out the subs which would have resulted in the loss of jobs and future investment or are we going to see another flip flop post.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 1, 2014)

Old Skier said:



			Did you read any of this thread.  The bit where iscot was going to chuck out the subs which would have resulted in the loss of jobs and future investment or are we going to see another flip flop post.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry - you've misunderstood what I posted.

The Tories were trumpeting yesterday that the jobs have been secured!  But they have not been at risk since Scotland said NO.  So they cannot have been 'secured' unless following the 19th September there was a residual risk that we are not aware of.  The only residual risk would be that the whole shebang might have decamped to Devonport - but the risk of that was always miniscule; or they'd scrap Trident.

So please.  All that has happened is that Westminster has declared how much it will cost to maintain the Trident submarine fleet at Faslane until 2020.  The only thing that has actually been secured is the contract and profits that Babcocks get to do the work.


----------



## Old Skier (Oct 1, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Sorry - you've misunderstood what I posted.

The Tories were trumpeting yesterday that the jobs have been secured!  But they have not been at risk since Scotland said NO.  So they cannot have been 'secured' unless following the 19th September there was a residual risk that we are not aware of.  The only residual risk would be that the whole shebang might have decamped to Devonport - but the risk of that was always miniscule; or they'd scrap Trident.
		
Click to expand...

You and I will never know if those jobs were at risk.

Perhaps the government are concerned that the noisey minority will pull the same stunt again and again.  There was consideration for a move to Davenport, and many in Devon and Cornwall hoping for an increase in job opportunities.  As for the scrapping of Trident, I would be all for it but as it would take our beloved leaders from all sides of the house of off the top table in the UN its not going to happen for a while.


----------



## Val (Oct 1, 2014)

Of course the jobs are secured, they have a new contract, it doesn't matter if they were previously at risk or not.


----------



## Foxholer (Oct 1, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Sorry - you've misunderstood what I posted.

...
		
Click to expand...

And you rather misrepresented what is involved with the contract! The Faslane jobs are only 20% of the jobs involved!


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Oct 1, 2014)

Is this thread still going ??


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 1, 2014)

What a difference a few days make if you are the pro Unionist Daily Record editor.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/sign-petition-daily-record-urge-4355238
http://conservativewoman.co.uk/nick-wood-took-vulcan-expose-constitutional-vandalism/


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			And you rather misrepresented what is involved with the contract! The Faslane jobs are only 20% of the jobs involved!
		
Click to expand...

Sorry - I took my information from this source.  And yes - more than just the Trident subs

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...tract-secures-1500-jobs-at-faslane.1412154049


----------



## FairwayDodger (Oct 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			What a difference a few days make if you are the pro Unionist Daily Record editor.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/sign-petition-daily-record-urge-4355238
http://conservativewoman.co.uk/nick-wood-took-vulcan-expose-constitutional-vandalism/

Click to expand...

The Daily Record editor has an arse full of skelfs from sitting on the fence thoughout the whole referendum saga. They were resolutely neutral from what I saw.


----------



## Old Skier (Oct 1, 2014)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Is this thread still going ??
		
Click to expand...

No :lol:


----------



## FairwayDodger (Oct 1, 2014)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Is this thread still going ??
		
Click to expand...

55% wish it would stop but 45% keep rumbling on......


----------



## Old Skier (Oct 1, 2014)

:rofl:



FairwayDodger said:



			55% wish it would stop but 45% keep rumbling on...... 

Click to expand...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 1, 2014)

Hopefully it will finish on Burns Night when we see promises being fulfilled.
I have my doubts though.


----------



## JamPal (Oct 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I would be interested to hear what your version of 'the wrong reasons' were.
		
Click to expand...

The many lies told about the Scottish economy.

The many lies told about how much Scot's get per capita of the government's spending.

The many lies told to convince people they have no say. 

Those wrong reasons perhaps?


----------



## JamPal (Oct 1, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Hopefully it will finish on Burns Night when we see promises being fulfilled.
I have my doubts though.
		
Click to expand...

I hope they deliver on one promise. Equality for the English. 

We should get our fair share of spending. and since the Scottish government is devolved Scots should have no say in equivalent English affairs.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 1, 2014)

JamPal said:



			I hope they deliver on one promise. Equality for the English. 

We should get our fair share of spending. and since the Scottish government is devolved Scots should have no say in equivalent English affairs.
		
Click to expand...

Quite agree that Scotland and England [and Wales and NI] should get their fair share of the common wealth of the UK. 
As I have said we should turn the Barnett formula on it's head and allow Scotland to contribute it's fair share of it's wealth to the Westminster coffers.
I also agree that English MPs should only vote on English UK matters, provided of course that Scottish MPs can also only vote on Scottish UK matters.
If you had followed this thread you should be aware that I am all in favour of a separate English Parliament and a much reduced Westminster [or Preston] parliament
Until then we shall keep the status quo.


----------



## Foxholer (Oct 1, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			... *an arse full of skelfs* ...
		
Click to expand...

What a fantastic expression! :thup:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 1, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			What a fantastic expression! :thup:
		
Click to expand...

It is.

BTW did you see that the Conservative Housewifes blog called the Daily Record [aka as the Daily Ranger] left wing, how double dare they.


----------



## williamalex1 (Oct 1, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			The Daily Record editor has an arse full of skelfs from sitting on the fence thoughout the whole referendum saga. They were resolutely neutral from what I saw.
		
Click to expand...

He's had a rough ride recently.


----------



## SocketRocket (Oct 14, 2014)

I dreamed a dream!

View attachment 12605


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 14, 2014)

2 weeks later ?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Dec 18, 2014)

And with the oil price slumping to less than $60 a barrel versus the White paper's worst case scenario of $92, and the North sea oil industry reportedly in crisis, I wonder if any yes voters are now breathing a sigh of relief?

Certainly the yes/no arguments of scaremongering vs over-optimism on the oil issue seem to have been categorically answered.....


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 18, 2014)

Nope I doubt it. There seems to be a high number of high profile figures who don't believe in the democratic process and are flip flopping on their original statement that they would not be raising the matter again in their lifetime.


----------



## Val (Dec 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			And with the oil price slumping to less than $60 a barrel versus the White paper's worst case scenario of $92, and the North sea oil industry reportedly in crisis, I wonder if any yes voters are now breathing a sigh of relief?

Certainly the yes/no arguments of scaremongering vs over-optimism on the oil issue seem to have been categorically answered.....
		
Click to expand...

I hear what your saying but it's all lies...................


----------



## DCB (Dec 18, 2014)

If OPEC keep dropping the price, it's going to be more than just us who are screwed :angry: There's been a slow down in support services for a while, this could speed it up and if we lose the experienced people out of the industry it'll take a long time to recover.


----------



## Foxholer (Dec 18, 2014)

DCB said:



			If OPEC keep dropping the price, it's going to be more than just us who are screwed :angry: There's been a slow down in support services for a while, this could speed it up and if we lose the experienced people out of the industry it'll take a long time to recover.
		
Click to expand...

Tough on UK - and Scotland in particular - but I wonder, though it's probably a Tom Clancy inspired fantasy, whether some sort of deal has been done to put a lot more pressure on the Russian economy, which is pretty much dependent on Oil/Gas!


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			though it's probably a Tom Clancy inspired fantasy, whether some sort of deal has been done to put a lot more pressure on the Russian economy, which is pretty much dependent on Oil/Gas!
		
Click to expand...

Nail/head


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Dec 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Tough on UK - and Scotland in particular - but I wonder, though it's probably a Tom Clancy inspired fantasy, whether some sort of deal has been done to put a lot more pressure on the Russian economy, which is pretty much dependent on Oil/Gas!
		
Click to expand...

Don't start writing the novel yet!

It has far more to do with falling demand worldwide and the extensive development of shale gas (fracking) in the USA.


----------



## bluewolf (Dec 18, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Tough on UK - and Scotland in particular - but I wonder, though it's probably a Tom Clancy inspired fantasy, whether some sort of deal has been done to put a lot more pressure on the Russian economy, which is pretty much dependent on Oil/Gas!
		
Click to expand...

Yup. Russia in financial meltdown would appear to be a short term benefit of the bottoming out of oil prices.. I wonder if anyone has forecast the long term effects of a ruined Russian economy? 
Note - I haven't, but in my experience, short term benefits usually have long term negatives...


----------



## Liverbirdie (Dec 18, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			Don't start writing the novel yet!

It has far more to do with falling demand worldwide and the extensive development of shale gas (fracking) in the USA.
		
Click to expand...

USA in recent months has now become a net exporter, for the first time in decades, if ever at all.

Lower demand worldwide, OPEC not cutting supply, as individual countries don't want to lose market share.

I don't know the upshot, but I see OPEC as equally at fault for the recession as bankers. Why were oil prices so high in the recession, which to me turbo-charged the recession. All goods have to be shipped one way or the other, and the price of fuel to households also curbed household spending. Double whammy.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Dec 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			And with the oil price slumping to less than $60 a barrel versus the White paper's worst case scenario of $92, and the North sea oil industry reportedly in crisis, I wonder if any yes voters are now breathing a sigh of relief?

Certainly the yes/no arguments of scaremongering vs over-optimism on the oil issue seem to have been categorically answered.....
		
Click to expand...

I've seen this analysis a few places today, it usually verges on smugness at the loss of value in oil and unemployment.

An argument could be made that the pro-indy lobbying for an oil fund to see us through times like this was correct all along, but don't let that get in the way of kicking those who wanted independence.The near-joyous reaction to this pretty bleak news is quite frankly, weird.

Scotland gdp excluding nso is 99% ok UK btw, and was always, _always_ treated as a bonus.But you know that.


----------



## SocketRocket (Dec 18, 2014)

Bit off topic


----------



## FairwayDodger (Dec 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I've seen this analysis a few places today, it usually verges on smugness at the loss of value in oil and unemployment.

An argument could be made that the pro-indy lobbying for an oil fund to see us through times like this was correct all along, but don't let that get in the way of kicking those who wanted independence.The near-joyous reaction to this pretty bleak news is quite frankly, weird.

Scotland gdp excluding nso is 99% ok UK btw, and was always, _always_ treated as a bonus.But you know that.
		
Click to expand...

Not at all. The populist argument was always that independent Scotland would be an oil-rich utopia and anyone who questioned the nats projections was ridiculed as a feartie or a scaremonger.

So I'm not rejoicing at the depressing news but it's important the SNP are not allowed to brush it under the carpet so they can rush us into another referendum.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Dec 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Not at all. The populist argument was always that independent Scotland would be an oil-rich utopia and anyone who questioned the nats projections was ridiculed as a feartie or a scaremonger.

So I'm not rejoicing at the depressing news but it's important the SNP are not allowed to brush it under the carpet so they can rush us into another referendum.
		
Click to expand...

Nonsense, utter nonsense.Looks like you'd swallowed the line being spun by unionists.At no point, *at no point* did anyone seriously campaigning for independence suggest some kind of 'oil-rich utopia', so you're either lying or naive enough to swallow how things were portrayed during a pretty heated campaign.What was suggested that having control of all financial levers (including oil) Scotland could be socially more equal.We'll not know for the forseeable if that is possible, but don't tell lies and act all smug.

you're not David Cochrane by any chance?


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 18, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			so they can rush us into another referendum.
		
Click to expand...

They will try. They weren't keen on the last democratly achieved answer.


----------



## Val (Dec 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Nonsense, utter nonsense.Looks like you'd swallowed the line being spun by unionists.A*t no point, at no point did anyone seriously campaigning for independence suggest some kind of 'oil-rich utopia', *so you're either lying or naive enough to swallow how things were portrayed during a pretty heated campaign.What was suggested that having control of all financial levers (including oil) Scotland could be socially more equal.We'll not know for the forseeable if that is possible, but don't tell lies and act all smug.

you're not David Cochrane by any chance?
		
Click to expand...

If not then why all the talk of oil on the west coast too, or is that all made up lies too?


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Dec 18, 2014)

Val said:



			If not then why all the talk of oil on the west coast too, or is that all made up lies too?
		
Click to expand...

Because it would be an extra income source.A source that is possibly being kept hidden just now to allow the movement of weapons of mass destruction in and out of faslane.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Dec 18, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			Nonsense, utter nonsense.Looks like you'd swallowed the line being spun by unionists.At no point, *at no point* did anyone seriously campaigning for independence suggest some kind of 'oil-rich utopia', so you're either lying or naive enough to swallow how things were portrayed during a pretty heated campaign.What was suggested that having control of all financial levers (including oil) Scotland could be socially more equal.We'll not know for the forseeable if that is possible, but don't tell lies and act all smug.

you're not David Cochrane by any chance?
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but you're talking rubbish now. The oil price has dipped to less than half the value the SNP used as the basis for their propaganda.

"oil-rich utopia" is my own poetic licence rather than official SNP policy but the implication was clear.


----------



## DCB (Dec 18, 2014)

I can remember , not that long ago, when oil hit $10 and huge swathes of office space suddenly became available in Aberdeen. In the intervening twenty years it's been all over the scale, up to $140 - $150 and now heading way back down.

Interesting link here from way back in 2009

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aox.KsSOudpA

I wonder ....


----------



## FairwayDodger (Dec 18, 2014)

DCB said:



			I can remember , not that long ago, when oil hit $10 and huge swathes of office space suddenly became available in Aberdeen. In the intervening twenty years it's been all over the scale, up to $140 - $150 and now heading way back down.

Interesting link here from way back in 2009

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aox.KsSOudpA

I wonder ....
		
Click to expand...

So the price will be somewhere between $10 and $200, depending on which estimate you believe! Experts, eh? What is it they say about statistics?


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2014)

I see the hypocritical little man is at it again http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...nce-alex-salmond_n_6359180.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

So the wishes of those living in Scotland counts for nothing.


----------



## CMAC (Dec 20, 2014)

Mr Salmond said: "A taxi driver said to me that he had voted No to independence but he would do it differently next time. I think we would win if there was another referendum."


there you have it! that's the level of stability and facts he uses to fight for independence. Deluded fantasist who successfully recruited many 'temporary' followers


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 14, 2016)

CMAC said:



			Mr Salmond said: "A taxi driver said to me that he had voted No to independence but he would do it differently next time. I think we would win if there was another referendum."


there you have it! that's the level of stability and facts he uses to fight for independence. Deluded fantasist who successfully recruited many 'temporary' followers
		
Click to expand...

Thought I'd check how the temporary followers the SNP had back then by looking to see level of support for the parties since then

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/quest...y-vote-in-a-scottish-parliament-election#line

and on the indy question (since the EU vote)

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/quest...-independence-referendum-if-held-now-ask#line


----------

