Scotland Debate

[Dodger]

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

I am happy that you believe that.

Keep it up, it's great to see.:thup::thup:

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I am happy that you believe that.

Keep it up, it's great to see.:thup::thup:

Englandshire ? Can you not find it ?

 

[Foxholer]

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.

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]

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]

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!

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]

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

 

[Deleted member 15344]

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?

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]

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 ?

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]

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.

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.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

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:

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 £1.5billion investment needed to even get started with no guarantee of success due to geologically and depth problems

Is that ok for starters ?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

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.

The white paper is a waste of space full of promises built on nothing

 

[FairwayDodger]

Interesting stuff, dodger, I didn't realise you didn't live in Scotland. So you don't actually have a vote then?

 

[williamalex1]

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.

Pilgrim Fathers were silly boys , ok.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Interesting stuff, dodger, I didn't realise you didn't live in Scotland. So you don't actually have a vote then?

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]

Interesting stuff, dodger, I didn't realise you didn't live in Scotland. So you don't actually have a vote then?

Does the Queen have a vote never mind Dodger.

 

[Foxholer]

The white paper is a waste of space full of promises built on nothing

I guess you weren't convinced then! :rofl:

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 £1.5billion investment needed to even get started with no guarantee of success due to geologically and depth problems

Is that ok for starters ?

But if you read The White Paper objectively, you'd see most of these issues were addressed!

 

[Dodger]

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 £1.5billion investment needed to even get started with no guarantee of success due to geologically and depth problems

Is that ok for starters ?

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]

Does the Queen have a vote never mind Dodger.

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'!

 

[Deleted member 15344]

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:

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]

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

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: