Scottish Independence discussion area

Wurzelbert

First Up wrote: »

The borders of Europe and much of the rest of the world were shaped to some extent by violence and bloodshed. That doesn't necessarily mean they should be changed.

that is very true, yet it also does not mean borders have to stay the same for all eternity...and they never will anyway...

First Up wrote: »

As for "shaking up" Europe, have you something specific in mind?

not really, it should be obvious enough that scottish independence would change things in europe in a number of ways...like (great) britain’s position in europe, possibly scotland as a new eu member at some stage, the strengthening of other separatist movements etc....many things could or would change...would be interesting to see anyway...

Happyman42

First Up wrote: »

That's profound. Now back to the question; did you listen to what Robinson asked and Salmond said in reply? Which bit of that is "propaganda"?

The bit where he cut the longer question and used the trite unanswerable bit to depict Salmond as somebody refusing to answer questions.
As I said, it's a journalistic trick employed by those great bastions of the press, The Sun and News Of The World and believed by consumers of the same muck.

First Up

Wurzelbert wrote: »

that is very true, yet it also does not mean borders have to stay the same for all eternity...and they never will anyway...



not really, it should be obvious enough that scottish independence would change things in europe in a number of ways...like (great) britain’s position in europe, possibly scotland as a new eu member at some stage, the strengthening of other separatist movements etc....many things could or would change...would be interesting to see anyway...

Oh it could be interesting alright. What's that Chinese curse - "may you live in interesting times".

EunanMac

Pity Paisely didn't live to see Scottish independence.
Ian and his ilk's hatred filled sectarian grip is finally slipping.

Wurzelbert

First Up wrote: »

Oh it could be interesting alright. What's that Chinese curse - "may you live in interesting times".

well yeah, history just keeps on happening all around us, whether we like it or not...what makes you think scottish independence would be such a bad thing by the way?

Fratton Fred

Wurzelbert wrote: »

i don’t really think it will happen as the fear of the unknown is likely to be stronger than scottish nationalism in the end...though i personally do hope the scots vote for independence, simply because it would shake up europe a little and would in a way right some ancient wrongs...after all scotland was subdued and basically forced into the union in centuries of violence and bloodshed to begin with..

May I suggest you go and read up on the history of Scotland and how the kingdom of Britain came in to being.

First Up

Wurzelbert wrote: »

well yeah, history just keeps on happening all around us, whether we like it or not...what makes you think scottish independence would be such a bad thing by the way?

Without getting too technical about it, economic dis-aggregation is not a good idea in today's global economy. Small population = small market and less attractive to invest in; small tax base will limit government's ability to fund services and maintain infrastructure; capital flight over uncertainties of the future; cost of replicating all branches of government; reduced influence in global affairs; risk of "brain drain"; loss of control over fiscal policy - things like that. I also suspect a labour/SNP dominated political landscape would be unbalanced.

Iwasfrozen

EunanMac wrote: »

Pity Paisely didn't live to see Scottish independence.
Ian and his ilk's hatred filled sectarian grip is finally slipping.

I wouldn't worry about it. You and I won't live to see Scottish independence.

First Up

Happyman42 wrote: »

The bit where he cut the longer question and used the trite unanswerable bit to depict Salmond as somebody refusing to answer questions.
As I said, it's a journalistic trick employed by those great bastions of the press, The Sun and News Of The World and believed by consumers of the same muck.

The "trite, unanswerable bit" was actually the nub of the matter. You go on about propaganda but when confronted by quotes from serious, professional and influential people, all Salmond could do was waffle some propaganda of his own - while also criticising the BBC for asking him hard questions.

LordNorbury

My 2 cents worth... I think it's an absolute outrage that YET AGAIN, we have big business interests, big huge vested interests that are as usual coming mainly from the financial/banking sector, (a sector that the same taxpayers now under threat had to bail out!!!), threatening some sort of financial Armageddon for a nation, if people should dare to choose to exercise a political option that they believe might work better for them in the future, many of whom genuinely believe that they have suffered a lifetime of social deprivation due to being some sort of outlier province of the United Kingdom, and believe that Scottish independence may well deliver a more worthwhile future for them and their children.

We had the exact same threats here when it came to Lisbon I and II, but being Irish people, we lacked the balls to see past the menace and of course being a profoundly THICK nation, we voted as we were told.

The whole of Europe would be a healthier place next week if the Scots stood up for themselves, asserted themselves and their independence, and gave all these big vested interests a message that is seriously overdue, a message I might mention, that we lacked the balls to give them over on this side of the pond, when these very same despicable threats were being directed at us over the last 6 odd years, whether it was in relation to the banking bailout we were bounced into paying for, or the farces that we Lisbon I and II.

Every Scottish person also should withdraw money immediately from any bank that is openly threatening their clear democratic right to choose how they wish to govern their affairs as a nation going forward, this would put an end immediately to a lot of this crap.

First Up

LordNorbury wrote: »

My 2 cents worth... I think it's an absolute outrage that YET AGAIN, we have big business interests, big huge vested interests that are as usual coming mainly from the financial/banking sector, (a sector that the same taxpayers now under threat had to bail out!!!), threatening some sort of financial Armageddon for a nation, if people should dare to choose to exercise a political option that they believe might work better for them in the future, many of whom genuinely believe that they have suffered a lifetime of social deprivation due to being some sort of outlier province of the United Kingdom, and believe that Scottish independence may well deliver a more worthwhile future for them and their children.

We had the exact same threats here when it came to Lisbon I and II, but being Irish people, we lacked the balls to see past the menace and of course being a profoundly THICK nation, we voted as we were told.

The whole of Europe would be a healthier place next week if the Scots stood up for themselves, asserted themselves and their independence, and gave all these big vested interests a message that is seriously overdue, a message I might mention, that we lacked the balls to give them over on this side of the pond, when these very same despicable threats were being directed at us over the last 6 odd years, whether it was in relation to the banking bailout we were bounced into paying for, or the farces that we Lisbon I and II.

Every Scottish person also should withdraw money immediately from any bank that is openly threatening their clear democratic right to choose how they wish to govern their affairs as a nation going forward, this would put an end immediately to a lot of this crap.

That sort of gibberish isn't worth two cents. Save it and put it towards the cost of a call to Joe Duffy, where you will be among friends.

Happyman42

First Up wrote: »

The "trite, unanswerable bit" was actually the nub of the matter. You go on about propaganda but when confronted by quotes from serious, professional and influential people, all Salmond could do was waffle some propaganda of his own - while also criticising the BBC for asking him hard questions.

The BBC's job is to report what he says, whether they think it's propaganda or not...NOT to slant it. It was a longer question and it was edited to make it look like he wasn't answering or evading.

It's not the first time the BBC have done similar but then I wouldn't expect somebody so obviously gullible to be aware of that.

First Up

Happyman42 wrote: »

The BBC's job is to report what he says, whether they think it's propaganda or not...NOT to slant it. It was a longer question and it was edited to make it look like he wasn't answering or evading.

It's not the first time the BBC have done similar but then I wouldn't expect somebody so obviously gullible to be aware of that.

Did they edit Salmond's reply? He had every opportunity to make his point in response. He didn't - because he couldn't.

Blaming the BBC for Salmond's ineptitude and lack of substance to his argument is a bit feeble.

Piliger

Long Gone wrote: »

If enough Scotch people are stupid enough to vote yes the remaining UK will enjoy an economic boom as people, jobs and assets are forced to repatriate south... Scottish banks/insurance/savings/pensions exist as a specialist centre to manage British finances (55 million Brits, not 6 million Scots). Civil servants sent up by London will have to come back. UK Armed Forces will have to come back (Scotland won't need a Royal Navy to watch for its fish, and won't need an RAF to watch the Russian visitors). UK Arts Councils, scientific & research bodies, UK Charities, will bring people and money back south... So submarines go to Plymouth. Shipbuilding goes to Portsmouth. Banking to London & Birmingham. Insurance & Pensions to Bournemouth. Civil service to Cardiff, Belfast & London. Arts to Manchester... If the British cities are smart, they'll already be preparing for the possible landgrab to attract companies, jobs, people, home buyers... But non EU Scots will have to compete for British jobs versus other similar non-EU nations, like America, Canada, Malaysia, Singapore, with the same visa restrictions... No job, no stay. On benefits, go home... It will be turbulent for sure. And it's really tough if there's 49% of Scots that 'get it'... But the 51% will only learn important lessons by making mistakes... Britain can't buy love. It should and will let Scotland go if they want to go. But they make their bed then let them lie in it - They're not having it both ways which is what they will want....

Tried to find one redeeming grace in this ... not one.

Piliger

Long Gone wrote: »

Partly because of the disruption and uncertainty that a break up of the current UK would cause, partly because the UK is such a long established and internationally respected institution, but mainly because they know damn well that the scots will want and try to be able to play it both ways - More power for Salmond and his narrow minded ilk, more petty (and pathetic) Scotch nationalism, while still retaining all the current benefits of being part of the union like using the pound and having job opportunities in all of the UK.

They cannot have a la carte so-called independence....

This is fantasy land. Britain is the giver of all prosperity and power .... yeah right.

Fratton Fred

LordNorbury wrote: »

My 2 cents worth... I think it's an absolute outrage that YET AGAIN, we have big business interests, big huge vested interests that are as usual coming mainly from the financial/banking sector, (a sector that the same taxpayers now under threat had to bail out!!!), threatening some sort of financial Armageddon for a nation, if people should dare to choose to exercise a political option that they believe might work better for them in the future, many of whom genuinely believe that they have suffered a lifetime of social deprivation due to being some sort of outlier province of the United Kingdom, and believe that Scottish independence may well deliver a more worthwhile future for them and their children.

We had the exact same threats here when it came to Lisbon I and II, but being Irish people, we lacked the balls to see past the menace and of course being a profoundly THICK nation, we voted as we were told.

The whole of Europe would be a healthier place next week if the Scots stood up for themselves, asserted themselves and their independence, and gave all these big vested interests a message that is seriously overdue, a message I might mention, that we lacked the balls to give them over on this side of the pond, when these very same despicable threats were being directed at us over the last 6 odd years, whether it was in relation to the banking bailout we were bounced into paying for, or the farces that we Lisbon I and II.

Every Scottish person also should withdraw money immediately from any bank that is openly threatening their clear democratic right to choose how they wish to govern their affairs as a nation going forward, this would put an end immediately to a lot of this crap.

It's the eu that will make the banks move their head offices, they have no choice.

donegaLroad

donegaLroad wrote: »

Scotland has 25% of Europes wave and wind energy potential.

If anyone can play this game I would love a source for this.

Europe is a big place, this sounds VERY hard to believe.

Piliger

LordNorbury wrote: »

My 2 cents worth... I think it's an absolute outrage that YET AGAIN, we have big business interests, big huge vested interests that are as usual coming mainly from the financial/banking sector, (a sector that the same taxpayers now under threat had to bail out!!!), threatening some sort of financial Armageddon for a nation, if people should dare to choose to exercise a political option that they believe might work better for them in the future, many of whom genuinely believe that they have suffered a lifetime of social deprivation due to being some sort of outlier province of the United Kingdom, and believe that Scottish independence may well deliver a more worthwhile future for them and their children.

You are 100% right here. It is blatant anti democratic scaremongering and I hope the Scottish people remember it for a long time.

We had the exact same threats here when it came to Lisbon I and II, but being Irish people, we lacked the balls to see past the menace and of course being a profoundly THICK nation, we voted as we were told.

Nothing of the sort happened with Lisbon and we the Irish people made the right choice, a choice that has been proven consistently to be the right on for us politically and economically.

The whole of Europe would be a healthier place next week if the Scots stood up for themselves, asserted themselves and their independence, and gave all these big vested interests a message that is seriously overdue, a message I might mention, that we lacked the balls to give them over on this side of the pond, when these very same despicable threats were being directed at us over the last 6 odd years, whether it was in relation to the banking bailout we were bounced into paying for, or the farces that we Lisbon I and II.

Now we are sliding down the bullsh1t slope to fantasy land.

Every Scottish person also should withdraw money immediately from any bank that is openly threatening their clear democratic right to choose how they wish to govern their affairs as a nation going forward, this would put an end immediately to a lot of this crap.

No it won't it would do exactly the opposite. They should do it after the vote.

Fratton Fred

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If anyone can play this game I would love a source for this.

Europe is a big place, this sounds VERY hard to believe.

Basically, Scotland has a lot of coastline and big waves. All of which will disappear if Scotland votes no, maybe.

Also, it would appear, lots of straws to grasp at.

Frank Lee Midere

First Up wrote: »

Without getting too technical about it, economic dis-aggregation is not a good idea in today's global economy. Small population = small market and less attractive to invest in; small tax base will limit government's ability to fund services and maintain infrastructure; capital flight over uncertainties of the future; cost of replicating all branches of government; reduced influence in global affairs; risk of "brain drain"; loss of control over fiscal policy - things like that. I also suspect a labour/SNP dominated political landscape would be unbalanced.

A small population can trade with a larger population, it isn't necessarily less attractive to invest in, the tax base is normal relative to population size -- and you missed north sea oil, capital flight is probably a myth, and the rest is more fear mongering.

If bigger were better then India and Nigeria would be great countries. There are plenty of successful countries, including the one you live in, of around Scotland's size.

In fact what was bad for a lot of countries lately was not economic nationalism but the lack of it. Without the Euro the 2008 crash would be a non event.

Frank Lee Midere

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Basically, Scotland has a lot of coastline and big waves. All of which will disappear if Scotland votes no, maybe.

Also, it would appear, lots of straws to grasp at.

Wouldn't disappear but wouldn't be revenue for Scotland alone.

Smaller countries have advantages in setting their own industrial policies, the SDA would get more competitive.

From an Irish point of view we need them in the union, they should ignore the scaremongering though. Scotland is well able to survive on it's own.

Happyman42

First Up wrote: »

Did they edit Salmond's reply? He had every opportunity to make his point in response. He didn't - because he couldn't.

Blaming the BBC for Salmond's ineptitude and lack of substance to his argument is a bit feeble.

:rolleyes:

Did they give any reportage over to what he had to say to questions Robinson thought important enough to ask? No, they didn't, they edited selectively d to pander to their depiction of him(and your understanding of him) as somebody 'lacking substance'.
Shameful tactics and backfiring. Keep it up.

swimming in a sea

Do the "NOs" have it????? Yes is nearly 4/1 shot with the bookies

While the newspapers are saying its to close to call

A Dub in Glasgo

What is the fascination with the bookies?

Wurzelbert

Fratton Fred wrote: »

May I suggest you go and read up on the history of Scotland and how the kingdom of Britain came in to being.

yeah right...i take it you are against scottish independence then...

swimming in a sea

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

What is the fascination with the bookies?

Because they are usually a far better indicator of a result than an opinion poll.

A Dub in Glasgo

Did people buy an almanac then?

Long Gone

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Did people buy an almanac then?

I hope you're not buying your tins of tartan paint just yet ! .:)

A Dub in Glasgo

Long Gone wrote: »

I hope you're not buying your tins of tartan paint just yet ! .:)

I don't do tartan

Fratton Fred

Wurzelbert wrote: »

yeah right...i take it you are against scottish independence then...

Not particularly, if it's what they really want. Personally I see more cons than pros though.

Scotland approached England for a union though, there was no centuries of violence, other than the usual medieval violence neighbouring countries engaged in.

LordNorbury

First Up wrote: »

That sort of gibberish isn't worth two cents. Save it and put it towards the cost of a call to Joe Duffy, where you will be among friends.

That's a very well thought out dissection of a political opinion, I can see exactly where you are coming from there. Anything more substantive to add to the discussion maybe? :rolleyes:

Happyman42

LordNorbury wrote: »

That's a very well thought out dissection of a political opinion, I can see exactly where you are coming from there. Anything more substantive to add to the discussion maybe? :rolleyes:

He a man of substance!

Piliger

First Up wrote: »

Without getting too technical about it, economic dis-aggregation is not a good idea in today's global economy.

A YES vote won't dis-aggregate the market.

Small population = small market and less attractive to invest in;

Wrong again. Scotland is part of a single EU market and a big UK market. Nothing will change there.

small tax base will limit government's ability to fund services and maintain infrastructure;

No it won't. It will have a much smaller population to service

capital flight over uncertainties of the future;

Any capital that leaves this week will be back once the outcome is certain. That is how it works

cost of replicating all branches of government;

Scotland already have the vast majority of it's branches all already in place.

reduced influence in global affairs;

It will have far more influence in world affairs. At the moment Scotland has literally no voice at all. Once it is independent it will have a voice at all EU levels.

risk of "brain drain"; loss of control over fiscal policy - things like that.

At the moment they have no control whatsoever over fiscal policy.

I also suspect a labour/SNP dominated political landscape would be unbalanced.

What does unbalanced possibly mean ? Sounds like more of the same empty arguments.

A Dub in Glasgo

Hmmm, apparently UKIP & Nigel Farage will be campaigning at 8pm in Glasgow City Centre on a Friday night - provocative to say the least

eeepaulo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Hmmm, apparently UKIP & Nigel Farage will be campaigning at 8pm in Glasgow City Centre on a Friday night - provocative to say the least

Does he have much of a following in scotland?

A Dub in Glasgo

About 10% in the euro elections

Donkey Oaty

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

About 10% in the euro elections

Some of that will be an anti-Cameron/Westminster elite kind of thing though - and it would be really interesting to find out how many of them are in the Yes camp.

The Better Together group are not welcoming his presence, that's for sure.

eeepaulo

Will the name have to change to rukip if there is a yes vote,

gladrags

According to the IT 75% of Scottish land is owned by 2,500 people.

The duke of Buccleuch alone, owns 250,000 acres!.

Obviously the gentry do not want a yes vote.

Fratton Fred

gladrags wrote: »

According to the IT 75% of Scottish land is owned by 2,500 people.

The duke of Buccleuch alone, owns 250,000 acres!.

Obviously the gentry do not want a yes vote.

Am I missing something? What's that got to do with a yes or no vote?

First Up

LordNorbury wrote: »

That's a very well thought out dissection of a political opinion, I can see exactly where you are coming from there. Anything more substantive to add to the discussion maybe? :rolleyes:

That was a political opinion?

First Up

Piliger wrote: »

A YES vote won't dis-aggregate the market.
Wrong again. Scotland is part of a single EU market and a big UK market. Nothing will change there.

No it won't. It will have a much smaller population to service

Any capital that leaves this week will be back once the outcome is certain. That is how it works

Scotland already have the vast majority of it's branches all already in place.

It will have far more influence in world affairs. At the moment Scotland has literally no voice at all. Once it is independent it will have a voice at all EU levels.

At the moment they have no control whatsoever over fiscal policy.

What does unbalanced possibly mean ? Sounds like more of the same empty arguments.

How will Scotland have a.much smaller population to service? Are you expecting many to leave? And do you think the infrastructure will get smaller too?

Most of your arguments are of the "have our cake and eat it" persuasion. This fantasy that Scotland can be "independent" while still piggy backing on the rest of Britain for things it can't do for itself has only a few days to run. I wonder do the fantasists have a Plan B?

SaveOurLyric

Is there any force in Scotland if there is a Yes vote, behind ditching the Saxe-Coburg-Gothas, and putting the rightful King of Scotland, Franz, Duke of Bavaria on his throne ?

gladrags

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Am I missing something? What's that got to do with a yes or no vote?

I'm not sure to be honest.

The article implies that there is a lot at stake for the land owners if independence occurs.

I suppose when you think about it,the consequences of a possible yes vote are only now surfacing.

Wurzelbert

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

Is there any force in Scotland if there is a Yes vote, behind ditching the Saxe-Coburg-Gothas, and putting the rightful King of Scotland, Franz, Duke of Bavaria on his throne ?

good point

Donkey Oaty

Idi Amin's descendants have maintained a dignified silence on the succession issue.

A Dub in Glasgo

http://postimg.org/image/864y1ynsd/

Look at the last sentence in the letter from the trade union USDAW to it's members

'I suggest that if you don't know - then you should vote NO'

eire4

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Some of that will be an anti-Cameron/Westminster elite kind of thing though - and it would be really interesting to find out how many of them are in the Yes camp.

The Better Together group are not welcoming his presence, that's for sure.

I bet they are not happy. Having Farage and the UKIP appearing is more likely to help the yes vote then anything I would think.

mbur

Stockholm Syndrome strikes again. Seems like it's coming down to Yes for Independence vs No for independence "Lite"

eire4

mbur wrote: »

Stockholm Syndrome strikes again. Seems like it's coming down to Yes for Independence vs No for independence "Lite"

The devomax option is not on the ballot. It is a straight up yes or no on full independance on tha ballot. That is what London pushed for it to be.