Scottish independence

[Old Skier]

I can't quite get my head around what you are saying there Old Skier, can you expand a bit so that I can understand please.

Seemed fairly clear to me, however it is Friday afternoon.

Sent from my thingy whilst drinking a pint of fine English ale from the pub.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Not gonna happen.

Or we could turn the scare story on it's head and come up with an equally never gonna happen scenario.

Scotland vote yes, effectively a dissolving of The UK, Brussels says, hang on, we agreed the rebate with The UK, but The UK no longer exists in the same form, so that rebatet should be looked at again.France and Germany chuckle, tell Cameron that The old UK and Sevco UK are different, so the rebate is now invalid.

Queue implosion in Westminster.

LOL - good one my man

All the stuff (opt-outs, rebates etc) that the UK currently enjoys was granted to the UK - a UK that included Scotland - of course it did. And so if a YES vote then that UK no longer exists in the form the stuff was negotiated and so the other EU countries require a renegotiation of the terms of EU membership for the rUK.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I'll hazard a guess he means Scottish folk living in England, non-EU citizens.Twisted logic, but the only one I can think of.

Wot - you mean Scotland might be expected to pay my pension - eh?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Far fetched I agree, however the whole thing is based on if's, but's and maybe's on the Yes side so perhaps anything might all of a sudden be chucked on the table.

This whole thread is based on a whole herd of guesses.

And if the BT Campain was truthful - the whole NO thing assumes a load of ifs, buts and maybes - guesses both sides. Difference is that BT Campaign choses to simply rely on the status quo as the NO position - freeing them up to attack the uncertainties around the YES position. At the moment YES camp are trying to sell a positive view of gthe future, whereas the No camp tend to focus on the negatives of YES. If they were to have to start putting the positives of NO the uncertainties would be exposed.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

And if the BT Campain was truthful - the whole NO thing assumes a load of ifs, buts and maybes - guesses both sides. Difference is that BT Campaign choses to simply rely on the status quo as the NO position - freeing them up to attack the uncertainties around the YES position. At the moment YES camp are PUTTING A positive view whereas the No camp tend to focus on the negatives of YES. If they were to have to start putting the positives of NO the uncertainties would be exposed.

The "Never Never Land" described by A Salmond (failed economist) is not a positive, rather it is a misty-eyed fantasy. I agree that the No campaign could present their case better but it is always difficult to prove a negative.

As for keeping sterling as the currency, well that I feel would be the step that is too far for the English electorate.

More worrying still is the apparent bribe being offered to Scotland. Vote No and get Devolution plus. Again could prove a step too far for the majority of English people living outside the South East and tired of being governed by London.

 

[Old Skier]

Whatever happens this is, IMHO all going to end in tears. People only believe in democracy when it comes out in their favour. The Scots voted for and gave the SNP the mandate to go for independence, live with it and do it.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

The "Never Never Land" described by A Salmond (failed economist) is not a positive, rather it is a misty-eyed fantasy. I agree that the No campaign could present their case better but it is always difficult to prove a negative.

As for keeping sterling as the currency, well that I feel would be the step that is too far for the English electorate.

More worrying still is the apparent bribe being offered to Scotland. Vote No and get Devolution plus. Again could prove a step too far for the majority of English people living outside the South East and tired of being governed by London.

The BT Campaign don't have to prove a negative - they have to be clear and honest about what a NO will mean - because as sure as heck it isn't business as usual.

As you say yourself there is stuff around a NO that the UK outside of Scotland will not be happy about and/or would be a 'step too far' - and we do not know what that is. So in what you say you are getting towards the truth of it. What are BT offering - because pretending they offer the status quo is being somewhat disingenuous.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Whatever happens this is, IMHO all going to end in tears. People only believe in democracy when it comes out in their favour. The Scots voted for and gave the SNP the mandate to go for independence, live with it and do it.

Change usually hurts. No pain no gain. etc etc.

 

[ger147]

Whatever happens this is, IMHO all going to end in tears. People only believe in democracy when it comes out in their favour. The Scots voted for and gave the SNP the mandate to go for independence, live with it and do it.

Not all Scots who vote SNP want independence.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Not all Scots who vote SNP want independence.

And not all Scots who want independence vote SNP

 

[Old Skier]

Not all Scots who vote SNP want independence.

But all Scots knew that was the only real aim of the SNP.

 

[Old Skier]

Change usually hurts. No pain no gain. etc etc.

The pain may be more than everyone bargained for.

 

[ger147]

But all Scots knew that was the only real aim of the SNP.

And that ultimately it would be the people who would decide and not the SNP.

So my original point stands i.e. those voting SNP last time out were NOT voting for independence.

 

[Old Skier]

And that ultimately it would be the people who would decide and not the SNP.

So my original point stands i.e. those voting SNP last time out were NOT voting for independence.

But it was in there manifesto so what were those that voted SNP voting for.

 

[ger147]

But it was in there manifesto so what were those that voted SNP voting for.

A referendum was in their manifesto. Voting for a party that wants a referendum does NOT automatically follow that you want the same outcome from that referendum as that party.

 

[Old Skier]

A referendum was in their manifesto. Voting for a party that wants a referendum does NOT automatically follow that you want the same outcome from that referendum as that party.

I get it, everyone voted for the SNP so they could have a referendum, and all vote No. Great plan.

 

[ger147]

I get it, everyone voted for the SNP so they could have a referendum, and all vote No. Great plan.

You know they are the party of government up here too and do normal stuff like manage the Scottish budget, pass legislation and represent their constituents?

 

[CliveW]

The people of Scotland voted SNP as a protest against labour, not because they wanted independence.

 

[Old Skier]

You know they are the party of government up here too and do normal stuff like manage the Scottish budget, pass legislation and represent their constituents?

You have said nothing that detracts from their main aim which was to get independence for Scotland.

 

[HughJars]

The people of Scotland voted SNP as a protest against labour, not because they wanted independence.

A protest against a party not in power? Interesting twist there. normally there are protest votes against the sitting party, but last time out the sitting party exceeded all projected possible outcomes and secured a majority that the voting system was designed not to allow.

That's one helluva protest vote. In fact kinda like a huge endorsement of what the govt had actually been doing, but hey what do I know.