606v2 Rugby Fans Scottish Independence Thread

[George Carlin]

First topic message reminder :

 v
Let me start this off, then. I have printed and read all literature which either side has published on this debate over the past 2 years (including the main policy papers from the SNP and from Better Together/UK Treasury and the Wee Blue Book).
 
If I had the chance, I would think hard about it, but ultimately I think that I would vote 'no'.
 
It seems to me, with my pea brain, that:
 
1. As a professional economist, Alex Salmond has had his entire political and professional life to make a waterproof financial case for an independent Scotland. Provided that there isn't something I've missed, I cannot see that he has done so. How can we still be fishing for answers to very fundemental questions so close to the actual voting date? Surely if it was the case that Scotland had a solid long term financial future, there would be a far greater volume of published consensus? If the financial case for independence cannot be clearly and verifiably made (without optimistic financial projects which strain credulity), then this is where this debate begins and ends for me. What do we tell our kids otherwise?
 
2. I entirely understand and appreciate that stepping into the unknown cannot in itself be a reason to say 'no'. You cannot have opportunity without risk. However, is anyone else disappointed with the quality of verifiable information that has been made available to us throughout this entire debate? Whilst I don't expect all answers to all questions, surely it is better to err on the side of caution until such time as policy can be firmly established.
 
If this was a trial, the verdict would be 'not proven'.
 
What I don't believe is if Scotland votes no, the chance to do so again would be lost forever. I think that we may see another vote on this topic within a generation (20 years) if a 'no' vote does not have a clear majority amongst Scottish people. I would be happy with that.
 
Discuss. For the love of feck, please be nice.

[AsLongAsBut100ofUs]

Quins makes a good point, right now salmond and co are only garnering support due to the huge overiding issue of the yes vote, beyond that I'm willing to bet he's as privately educated and as slimey as anything Westminster has!

surely as a former oil and bank economist he'll only have scotlands best interest in mind come a potential yes vote?

Whatever the outcome potential to fortune in Scotland will become huge, and a small few will gain a huge amount of wealth and power, hopefully this will be monitered and carefully scrutinised, otherwise you'll just develop another corrupt Westminster based in Edinburgh opposed to London.

On another note, I have a freind moving to Edinburgh next week for work, and I am always back and forth, plus I have an adress there, how will a yes vote effect our access, travel, and work?

It won't - unless rUK votes to leave the EU

[SecretFly]

But then again I dont really understand why or what you guys are trying to do, probably because I come from a small independent country miles away from anyone else but the Aussies and Pacific Islands.

There is so much irony in your oinion though, laurie.  Because you come from a 'small independent country' you don't understand what the Scots are trying to do?

They're trying (some of them) to become more like you.... a small Independent country.  

What is so difficult to understand about that?  

Many here in the Northern Hemisphere would see a lot of similarities between Australia (with the British Queen as Head of State) and New Zealand (with the British Queen as Head of State).  We would see those two neighbouring southern hemisphere nations as having many cultural similarities but we'd never question their Independence from each other in a political sense.  They look after their own distinct political entities and yet still remain largely friends and trade partners etc.  

But Australia doesn't control New Zealand in a political sense - that's what Scottish Indpendence seekers want.  That too incidently is what many English people want in their increasingly servile relationship with the Greater EU.... they want the EU politically off their backs and yet they still wish friendship and mutual cooperation with European nations - but no orders and laws dictating policy from abroad.  Partnership by mutual consent not partnership by rigid laws controlled by bigger partners.

[Dave.]

I sincerely hope the Scots vote no, but it's up to the Scots.

In the event of a No vote, then I hope for a more federal UK. (Granted Stormont needs to sort it self before it should have any more powers)

[Notch]

You wouldn't see a single union jack today at an England soccer or rugby game. It's flag of st george all the way. Maybe the union has run it's course because I just haven't heard a heartfelt coherent speech about why it should be kept, from anyone. Just numbers and figures and dire predictions. Nothing from the heart.

You'll notice when they talk about the UK they hark back to the past, past glories- they struggle to articulate any kind of positive future for Britain. A Positive UK future isn't on the menu for people politically. The reality of the situation is the Better Together side sees the future of the country as one of managed decline. They don't say it, but it is implicit in the positions of the three main Westminster political parties. What the argument is is 'We implicitly accept that the future of the UK is going to be relatively bleak for many people living in it, perhaps even the majority, but in an Independent Scotland the future will be even worse."

It's pretty hard to argue that is an inspiring message even if you totally agree with it. I guess if I had to choose between pronounced long-term economic uncertainty as part of the UK or pronounced long-term economic uncertainty as part of an independent Scotland I'd go with the option that offers a more democratically accountable government.

[quinsforever]

Notch, you are rabidy anti-English mate.

Couple of things.

UK is in the best shape of all countries in europe with the exception of Germany. We have growth, we have a voice, and for those who excel in NI, Wales, Scotland or England there is a platform to be heard on the world stage in most any sphere of expertise as part or the UK (think G7, UN Security Council, 6th largest economy in the world, BBC World Service, etc, etc.). There have been plenty of non-English and English politicians, economists and businesspeople punching far above the weight of their respective nations by virtue of being part of something bigger - UK).

Secondly, this decision is a once-in-ten-lifetimes one for the people of Scotland. So every single person there has the right to shout their opinion as loudly as they want. Your misplaced outrage over Gavin Hastings referring to the British Lions (as they were then) is childish. Every person has the right to their opinion and to have it broadcast if they so wish. what is unacceptable is the cybernats type of aggressive abusive attempts to muzzle. i think there will be backlash against the cybernats in the event of a YES vote. Scotland may find itself a nation divided at the instant when it should feel most united.

[AsLongAsBut100ofUs]

Notch, you are rabidy anti-English mate.

Couple of things.

UK is in the best shape of all countries in europe with the exception of Germany. We have growth, we have a voice, and for those who excel in NI, Wales, Scotland or England there is a platform to be heard on the world stage in most any sphere of expertise as part or the UK (think G7, UN Security Council, 6th largest economy in the world, BBC World Service, etc, etc.). There have been plenty of non-English and English politicians, economists and businesspeople punching far above the weight of their respective nations by virtue of being part of something bigger - UK).

Secondly, this decision is a once-in-ten-lifetimes one for the people of Scotland. So every single person there has the right to shout their opinion as loudly as they want. Your misplaced outrage over Gavin Hastings referring to the British Lions (as they were then) is childish. Every person has the right to their opinion and to have it broadcast if they so wish. what is unacceptable is the cybernats type of aggressive abusive attempts to muzzle. i think there will be backlash against the cybernats in the event of a YES vote. Scotland may find itself a nation divided at the instant when it should feel most united.

Can't agree on the Hastings gaff, quinny, his brother Scott has made the same mistake several times and had it pointed out to him - at best you might argue it is insensitive, at worst, downright ignorant. Don't fall for all this cybernat b*llocks tho - when you have every organ of the mainstream media ranked up against you, then you'll inevitably get a grassroots presence on social media against you - I can only suggest you consider that the establishment is working overtime to maintain the status quo, with the 'impartial' BBC as the worst offender

[BigGee]

Well at least Glasgow winning this evening has lightened the pre referendum gloom somewhat. Even this thread has got very heavy and dark as D day has approached and I am getting very worried about what will come after whoever wins.

[Notch]

I wish I had the energy and time to be rabidly anything. I agree with you though, I would encourage any Scottish person to shout from the rooftops about this referendum whichever camp they fall into. It's too important to sit on the fence.

But I would also encourage any rugby fan (or player or administrator) to completely leave the Lions out of it, as getting that all mixed up in politics is not going to help anything. It's something we can enjoy regardless of political persuasion so why endanger that? I don't really care if you call it the British Lions or not. If you do refer to it that way it doesn't exactly reflect well on you as a person, but thats your own problem.

What I do care about is if its used as a platform for political grandstanding by some, whatever side of the debate they stand on. But if it is used for such, held up as the epitome of what the united UK offers when everyone works together and so on... well it's perhaps not unfair to point out that in fact its a team that already transcends borders as its drawn from two independent nations anyway so I'd question its relevance when it comes to any debate the future of Scotland

[quinsforever]

Asbo, not sure I agree that the BBC is particularly impartial. They report news for the whole of the UK not just those embroiled in the yes/no debate. For them to get heavily into the nitty gritty would be to be reporting outside their mandate. They are not a local news service.

I hope you get your YES vote, but frankly all the crying foul from Salmond, peter de vink et al is pathetic. Suing the Treasury for confirming RBS's move plans hours before RBS did so? Really? That is all about distracting people from the truth and instead making it about the messenger. Criticising anyone in business for speaking out as puppets of Cameron? Does anyone who is t already voting yes believe that weak weak attempt to dodge the message? Yet the BBC reports all Salmonds guff. I think that's reasonably impartial.

And anyway, once you Vote YES, Scotland won't be able to receive BBC. They will block foreign IP addresses. And scots wouldn't want to pay licence fees. So you will have the chance to create your own national broadcaster.

[SecretFly]

Notch, you are rabidy anti-English mate.

Couple of things.

UK is in the best shape of all countries in europe with the exception of Germany. We have growth, we have a voice, and for those who excel in NI, Wales, Scotland or England there is a platform to be heard on the world stage in most any sphere of expertise as part or the UK (think G7, UN Security Council, 6th largest economy in the world, BBC World Service, etc, etc.). There have been plenty of non-English and English politicians, economists and businesspeople punching far above the weight of their respective nations by virtue of being part of something bigger - UK).

Secondly, this decision is a once-in-ten-lifetimes one for the people of Scotland. So every single person there has the right to shout their opinion as loudly as they want. Your misplaced outrage over Gavin Hastings referring to the British Lions (as they were then) is childish. Every person has the right to their opinion and to have it broadcast if they so wish. what is unacceptable is the cybernats type of aggressive abusive attempts to muzzle. i think there will be backlash against the cybernats in the event of a YES vote. Scotland may find itself a nation divided at the instant when it should feel most united.

Highlighted bit I completely agree with.  Everyone with a view on the topic (Yes, No or Indifferent) have a right to have an opinion on it.  Some are comfortable enough keeping their opinions private, some want to share them in public.  If bankers, retailers and oil men can have a view then obviously sportsmen and cybernats also have a right to their view "as loudly as they want".


But what is a 'cybernat', Quins?  

And what is the backlash going to be against the cybernats in the event of a YES vote?  Afterall, that's virtually yet another veiled threat thrown at a group of people (cybernats) who have a right to their opinion (whoever they are) - afterall too, Salmond and his lot were accused of intimidation and threats to the banks and retailers who have expressed their readiness to desert Scotland in the event of a YES vote and yet, there have been many many threats coming from the south that have been propagandised as simply outlining the 'risks' of Scotland's desertion of the Union.

Threats all round amongst a group of peoples meant to love each other in a brotherly kind of way. But the cybernats, who are they?

[AsLongAsBut100ofUs]

Asbo, not sure I agree that the BBC is particularly impartial. They report news for the whole of the UK not just those embroiled in the yes/no debate. For them to get heavily into the nitty gritty would be to be reporting outside their mandate. They are not a local news service.

I hope you get your YES vote, but frankly all the crying foul from Salmond, peter de vink et al is pathetic. Suing the Treasury for confirming RBS's move plans hours before RBS did so? Really? That is all about distracting people from the truth and instead making it about the messenger. Criticising anyone in business for speaking out as puppets of Cameron? Does anyone who is t already voting yes believe that weak weak attempt to dodge the message? Yet the BBC reports all Salmonds guff. I think that's reasonably impartial.

And anyway, once you Vote YES, Scotland won't be able to receive BBC. They will block foreign IP addresses. And scots wouldn't want to pay licence fees. So you will have the chance to create your own national broadcaster.

Read back a few pages if you like on the question of getting the BBC in iScotland - its already been answered. On a different tack, here's a heart-rending story of courage about a cybernat: http://wingsoverscotland.com/we-are-not-afraid/

[ME-109]

You wouldn't see a single union jack today at an England soccer or rugby game. It's flag of st george all the way. Maybe the union has run it's course because I just haven't heard a heartfelt coherent speech about why it should be kept, from anyone. Just numbers and figures and dire predictions. Nothing from the heart.

You'll notice when they talk about the UK they hark back to the past, past glories- they struggle to articulate any kind of positive future for Britain. A Positive UK future isn't on the menu for people politically. The reality of the situation is the Better Together side sees the future of the country as one of managed decline. They don't say it, but it is implicit in the positions of the three main Westminster political parties. What the argument is is 'We implicitly accept that the future of the UK is going to be relatively bleak for many people living in it, perhaps even the majority, but in an Independent Scotland the future will be even worse."

It's pretty hard to argue that is an inspiring message even if you totally agree with it. I guess if I had to choose between pronounced long-term economic uncertainty as part of the UK or pronounced long-term economic uncertainty as part of an independent Scotland I'd go with the option that offers a more democratically accountable government.

Rabidly anti English and you haven't even mentioned ingerland...

[21st Century Schizoid Man]

Who controls the finances in this miserable country (U feckin K) ? Big feckin business and all the lying scum that goes with it. Who owns the banks ? Multi fecking nationals own the banks and guarantee everything else Ask ASBO ffs

Get your passport out why dont you !!!!!

[funnyExiledScot]

The Nats really are going nuts on this whole Project Fear spin from Yes HQ, really lapping it up. Just about any interjection from anyone supporting the Union is now "scaremongering", as if there really is only one side to this debate.

Meanwhile the new line from the spin room is that independence won't be a magic wand. Seems they are starting to get ready to cover their tracks. Having promised so so much the polls are showing that they might win. I suspect that rather than Project Fear the separatists will have Actual Fear if they win on the 18th. They will have to break promise after promise and I don't think the whole " magic wand" spin will give them enough cover.

[ME-109]

The Nats really are going nuts on this whole Project Fear spin from Yes HQ, really lapping it up. Just about any interjection from anyone supporting the Union is now "scaremongering", as if there really is only one side to this debate.

Meanwhile the new line from the spin room is that independence won't be a magic wand. Seems they are starting to get ready to cover their tracks. Having promised so so much the polls are showing that they might win. I suspect that rather than Project Fear the separatists will have Actual Fear if they win on the 18th. They will have to break promise after promise and I don't think the whole " magic wand" spin will give them enough cover.

Sounds like tomorrows headline in the dailymail..."Aliens say they wont fly over Scotland if they vote for independence - No more flying saucers promised".

[Notch]

The Nats really are going nuts on this whole Project Fear spin from Yes HQ, really lapping it up. Just about any interjection from anyone supporting the Union is now "scaremongering", as if there really is only one side to this debate.

Meanwhile the new line from the spin room is that independence won't be a magic wand. Seems they are starting to get ready to cover their tracks. Having promised so so much the polls are showing that they might win. I suspect that rather than Project Fear the separatists will have Actual Fear if they win on the 18th. They will have to break promise after promise and I don't think the whole " magic wand" spin will give them enough cover.

I've always had a bit of a suspicion that Salmonds end game from this was obtaining that much talked about chimera 'Devo Max'. After all he wanted it on the ballot originally and the government wouldn't allow it. But a narrow defeat thats enough to persuade the main parties in Westminster that they dare not take the Scottish electorates desire to remain in the UK for granted and there is a very large appetite for further devolution is a bit of a win win. If they deliver on their hastily cobbled together promises of more powers for the Scottish parliament thats a win of securing further devolution and of course if they renege on those promises or fail to get legislation concerning Devo Max passed then it's 'perfidious albion deceiving the Scottish electorate once again' and he can spin that to his political advantage as well.

[funnyExiledScot]

Who controls the finances in this miserable country (U feckin K) ?  Big feckin business and all the lying scum that goes with it.  Who owns the banks ?  Multi fecking nationals own the banks and guarantee everything else    Ask ASBO ffs

Get your passport out why dont you !!!!!

....and independence will solve all of this won't it?? There will be no big business or multinationals in Scotland will there?? Alex Salmond would never encourage large risky FS institutions, not in a socially just utopia like Scotland. He would never be in bed with the likes of Trump and Goodwin. Of course not. We are so different, left wing and socially just in Scotland, not like those nasty English elite who love weapons of mass destruction, inequality and food banks.

Sorry, don't mean to bully and scaremonger. I've clearly been reading too much. All the media and press are horribly biased. They are also scaremongering, as are those businessmen opposing independence. How dare they. All Tory elite no doubt, out of touch with the true patriots at Team Scotland. At least we now can look forward to their day of reckoning after the referendum, when the separatists will dole out punishment for those traitors with a different point of view, all in a socially just manner of course.

[funnyExiledScot]

The Nats really are going nuts on this whole Project Fear spin from Yes HQ, really lapping it up. Just about any interjection from anyone supporting the Union is now "scaremongering", as if there really is only one side to this debate.

Meanwhile the new line from the spin room is that independence won't be a magic wand. Seems they are starting to get ready to cover their tracks. Having promised so so much the polls are showing that they might win. I suspect that rather than Project Fear the separatists will have Actual Fear if they win on the 18th. They will have to break promise after promise and I don't think the whole " magic wand" spin will give them enough cover.

Sounds like tomorrows headline in the dailymail..."Aliens say they wont fly over Scotland if they vote for independence - No more flying saucers promised".

Don't joke about aliens. They are very important to the Yes campaign. So important that Alex Salmond led with a question about aliens in his TV cross examination. There's a man with a winning hand. Darling led with currency (and we still don't have a Plan B!) and Salmond led with questions about aliens and having to drive on the right.

Sorry, enough scaremongering for one evening.

[SecretFly]

The Nats really are going nuts on this whole Project Fear spin from Yes HQ, really lapping it up. Just about any interjection from anyone supporting the Union is now "scaremongering", as if there really is only one side to this debate.

Meanwhile the new line from the spin room is that independence won't be a magic wand. Seems they are starting to get ready to cover their tracks. Having promised so so much the polls are showing that they might win. I suspect that rather than Project Fear the separatists will have Actual Fear if they win on the 18th. They will have to break promise after promise and I don't think the whole " magic wand" spin will give them enough cover.

Sounds like tomorrows headline in the dailymail..."Aliens say they wont fly over Scotland if they vote for independence - No more flying saucers promised".

There goes the Space Base budget that was promised for a NO vote.  The pesky aliens are gonna take their hypertonic invigilation pulse engine technology back to where they came from before they know that the Scots voted right.  I guess the Ruskies and Branson are the only guys to get us into space once more.

[SecretFly]

the separatists will dole out punishment for those traitors with a different point of view, all in a socially just manner of course.

....After the Unionists beat the crap out of the cybernats.... don't forget the poor nats.... looks like Quins think they'll all be hunted down and sprayed with insect repellant

[funnyExiledScot]

Oh yes, the intimidation of the poor nationalists has been harrowing. You only have to see how the separatist speakers are being shouted down and pelted to know that the No campaign is clearly trying to silence the debate on key issues like the economy, health and defence.

Poor Cybernats as well. All they have been trying to do is engage rationally in the debate, and those Elite Tory WMD loving food bankers, corrupt to the core, mainly English, have been giving them a hard time, calling them names and preventing rationale debate.

I'm sure Team Scotland will look after them though.

[SecretFly]

They haven't been all that successful, have they?  The Yes campaign, that is - and their brutal bully boy tactics of stopping the repetitive drone of economy, health and defence issues.  I've been hearing nothing but those issues from the No camp for the last number of weeks.  How did that 'No' propaganda get through to my ears with the Pronat boot boys guaranteeing the 'truth' would not get out?

Security obviously WILL be an issue in an Independent Scotland afterall!  But the Suppress-the-Truth Ministry will get a grip on it in time.

[ME-109]

The thing is FES if the Scots want independence Econonmy, Health and Defence dont matter. If they dont then they apparently do matter. Neither is wrong, however it does come down to the fact that independence will happen (or not) because people feel they want an independent Scotland (or not). The arguments about health, defence, economy, aliens, the queen, the pound, the euro, kilt wearing or bagpipe playing are all irrelevant.

Neither are right about their arguments and neither are wrong. Will the economy change...yes. Will it be better or worse - the answer to both are possibly. Same with defence (it will be different for sure), or health...the answer to all these things are yes...it will be better/worse...all depending on your point of view...

Either way these are interesting times.

[quinsforever]

the person most scared of a YES should be Salmond. He wants devomax. With a YES vote, he is going to have to deliver on all his promises...sterling, EU membership, tax cuts, earlier retirement age, free uni education, flexible working arrangements for women, etc, etc.

Its not exactly the same, but Hollande got in as French President promising an end to austerity, big taxes on the rich and tax cuts for the poor, and he is now completely screwed by the gap between what he promised and the reality of what he can deliver.

But at least the Scots will know who to blame, and can put someone else in charge as and when. Rather than it being that evil Eton-educated Tory elite what did it.

Side note - i dont remember much complaining from English voters about the succession of Scots Prime Ministers and Chancellors (Blair, Brown, Brown, Darling) at Westminster that led the UK into a massive war and massive recession. Maybe the English considered those Scots to be part of the UK like the rest of us, no matter how unpopular their decisions or leadership, and that their decisions were made in good faith and with the best of intentions.

Sad to think that we in the rUK will be deprived of the best of Scots political and economic minds in the event of a YES. But best of luck to a fledgling Scotland in the event that it is a YES. Maybe the really good minds can lend Salmond a hand with the small task of creating the administrative infrastructure to oversee a nation.

Another side note. I reckon the cost to both Scotland and rUK of a YES vote in the 18 months following will be a few billion pounds in fees for lawyers, accountants, actuaries, consultants, advisors, etc. For each side. I really hope it turns out to be worth it for at least one of the sides.

[aucklandlaurie]

Well to all the Scots on here I wish you the best of luck with this one.

[HammerofThunor]

the person most scared of a YES should be Salmond. He wants devomax. With a YES vote, he is going to have to deliver on all his promises...sterling, EU membership, tax cuts, earlier retirement age, free uni education, flexible working arrangements for women, etc, etc.

Its not exactly the same, but Hollande got in as French President promising an end to austerity, big taxes on the rich and tax cuts for the poor, and he is now completely screwed by the gap between what he promised and the reality of what he can deliver.

Surely not?!

Don't ALL politicians do this? And I do mean every single one.

[RuggerRadge2611]

I suppose the part that makes me really angry is the promise of a fair and corrupt free Scotland.

Corruption is rife in Scottish politics. Residents in Aberdeen objected to Donald Trump's golf course as did the council. Trump visited the FM and he in turn visited Aberdeen council and the next day planning permission was granted. Is this the Nirvana of a corruption free Scotland we are promised?

As for a fairer Scotland, I can't think how we can ever look at ourselves in the mirror and call ourselves a fair society when we released a convicted Terrorist back to a tyranical regime in Libya to a hero's welcome. The Lockerbie bomber was convicted in our courts by an impartial jury and the SNP government let him go.

Alex Salmond and the SNP bend the rules of our country whenever it suits them.

I'm not saying Westminster politics is any better but the SNP goverment have no right to the moral high ground in this argument.

Onto creating this fairer "socialist" society. Either you want a socialist society or you don't. The arguments about Scotland being wealthy (although not proven) are some of the most selfish arguments I have ever heard.

All those hoping for a socialist paradise in Scotland seem all too willing to leave behind the poverty stricken areas of England, Wales and Northern Ireland just to see ourselves right.

It's wrong!

Finally I'm as working class as it gets. I have 4 older sisters 50% of whom are voting yes. My dad was a posty and my mum was a receptionist. Class has nothing to do with the vote.

[funnyExiledScot]

The thing is FES if the Scots want independence Econonmy, Health and Defence dont matter. If they dont then they apparently do matter. Neither is wrong, however it does come down to the fact that independence will happen (or not) because people feel they want an independent Scotland (or not).  The arguments about health, defence, economy, aliens, the queen, the pound, the euro, kilt wearing or bagpipe playing are all irrelevant.

Neither are right about their arguments and neither are wrong. Will the economy change...yes. Will it be better or worse - the answer to both are possibly. Same with defence (it will be different for sure), or health...the answer to all these things are yes...it will be better/worse...all depending on your point of view...

Either way these are interesting times.

I would love that to be true, that the outcome will depend on whether the people want independence or not, but polling suggests that people will be swayed by whether they will be worse off or better off. That's why all these unfunded promises by the Yes campaign are so dangerous. People are being duped and any attempt to explain otherwise is now negative scaremongering from an out of touch English Tory Elite. Long term I have no idea, far too many variables, but you can bet the house Fred Goodwin style that Scotland will be worse off in the short term as it makes the transition. I wish the separatists would just say this upfront.

[fa0019]

Have been away for the weekend but just want to add that the rugby players got involved because Alex Salmond said that people who feel passionate about Scotland will vote Yes. They as passionate scots took offence to the statement and that is why they came out in public support.

I wasn't public school educated, I didn't live in a council estate so I wouldn't say we were poor growing up but my family are unionists and not just because they simply care about their pensions... because it is who we are.

The thing I hate is that Alex Salmond will be nothing in an independent country. It will be left to Scottish Labour to pick up the pieces.  Then when the S*** hits the fan he can say, oh well I didn't want our own currency, I would have negotiated xyz from separation etc.
He doesn't have kids, nor does Sturgeon... he doesn't know what it requires to provide for your family, he doesn't care if these kids will have a worse chance of survival or not because he sees independence as a greater goal well that's fine when its someone's child.

I managed to grab a Scottish TV debate last night online. It was ridiculous. Some NHS doctor came up and asked the nationalists how will they deal with the 60 or so diseases which Scottish hospitals and doctors cannot deal with? These people are sent to England for treatment as they have nor the skills nor the capacity. How they struggle to recruit doctors and nurses in Scotland and can only supplement via persons from England and pay is far lower. How will they deal with that in an independent Scotland?

It was also shameful, absolutely shameful when Douglas Alexander talked about his mum who had worked in the NHS for 40 years and he got booed by the nationalists... DO THEY HAVE NO SHAME?
My parents and siblings have also spent their entire careers in the NHS and they themselves know full well the dependency the system has on England yet its just laughed off.... this isn't a laughing matter, its peoples lives we're talking about. The SNP have cut NHS funding over the last year, that is a fact and when we have less money to put in can they NOT reduce spending any more as much as they pledge?

Reminds me of the 60's film the producers with Gene Wilder... Congratulations, MR A, you own 90% of springtime for hitler. Congratulations MR B, you own 90% of springtime for hitler, congratulations MR C, you own 90% of springtime for hitler.
The SNP just make up figures as they go along... they know that they are in a win win situation.... they can pledge what they want because they know they won't be in power if they get independence so are not accountable for the consequences.

I have to say, I used to laud our education system, our prominent scientists, inventors etc but after this we will be the laughing stock of the entire world within 10 years.

They are pledging voodoo economics science, Scandinavian spending powers with US taxation rates.... yet remarkably you could see that the nationalist supporters somehow believe it. Its loco.

Got to the stage where seeing the man on the top of the bridge I can't help but say, yes you're my countryman, my friend... JUMP even though you're convinced you can fly.

I don't think its true that people are wanting independence regardless of the facts... they are being spun a web of lies and sorry to say they are too stupid to be able to read between the lines.

[fa0019]

PS people talk about Scotland being a possession of England and that it is right that we should separate because it is right to see the end of the empire.

Well we were not conquered.

We joined together in 1707. It was a union.

We had done so because the King of Scotland in 1603 became King of England on the death of Elizabeth I and for a 100 years we had shared a monarch. OUR KING BECAME THE KING OF ENGLAND.... there was no English takeover.

[SecretFly]

Any new nation would be worse off before they get better off, no matter how many resources, no matter how much inherent wealth.  The upheavels of political change of such magnitude will of course always have a "what do we do now?" period.  But of course that "What do we do now?" period will exist both north and south of the border if Yes is the decision.  It won't only be a Scottish issue.

But Germany was absolutely obliterated in the immediate aftermath of the 2nd world war, its people were forcefully divided between Western Influence and USSR influence, the people were shocked and heavily depressed, not knowing what would happen to them under the cloud of the hatred for them engendered by Hitler's regime.
But they grew and grew again, their confidence grew, they finally got their Nation united again and they've obviously become the European economic powerhouse....and all that happened in a few short decades after the war.  

But that was Germany - and that was coming from an absolute gutter in social and economic terms.  Scotland isn't at that level and I repeat, apart from all the talk of gloom coming from businesses and banks - each one of those entities will want to continue to do business in Scotland. It will be to their advantage to continue benefitting from a buoyant and confident Scotland.  So they talk gloom now but when the chips are down, it's those companies and banks that will be strongest supporters of a smooth transition to Scottish Independence (if that's what the Scottish people choose).  The banks, the oil companies, the retailers - they'll all require a confident and buoyant Scotland because it will mean one thing to them - profit.  Profit will outweigh politics when pragmatism rules.

[funnyExiledScot]

The Queen has invited the people of Scotland to think carefully about their decision, and the cybernats are already on her case, one on the Beeb suggesting that her comments "betray her Tory stance".

You couldn't make it up. The message is clear from the cybernats, don't think carefully, whatever you do!

[SecretFly]

PS people talk about Scotland being a possession of England and that it is right that we should separate because it is right to see the end of the empire.

Well we were not conquered.

We joined together in 1707. It was a union.

We had done so because the King of Scotland in 1603 became King of England on the death of Elizabeth I and for a 100 years we had shared a monarch. OUR KING BECAME THE KING OF ENGLAND.... there was no English takeover.

Why did the King of Scotland become the King of England?  Because it was a feudal system of Kingship interbreeding to control territory and realms.  The Scottish King became the English King because he was already closely related to the English throne.  Throneship was imposed on many peoples on the island - they didn't vote for them.

And in 1707, who voted to join the union?  A parliament of the privileged - Sirs and Lords.  Even then, the Parliament in Scotland was always still only a token Indpendence as the Overlord of Scotland was still the English king (in a time when the King still had substantial political power, he wasn't just a symbol)  Indeed, wasn't there a committee or something to organise the details of Union - so many representatives from Scotland and so many from England?  The members of the Scottish commitee or grouping were chosen by the Queen - who again lived in England and was English.

Scotland's history and England's history is full of wars designed to either conquer or fight off a conquering.  You might say those folk memories hang in there even to this day - it was never the underclasses or indeed middle classes or indeed women who voted for any Union... it was a design of landed gentry Parliamentarians who from the start had heavy links to the English, given many of them recieved their personal wealth and influence from English overlords over the century.

[quinsforever]

Germany is a bad example SF. They benefited from the largest international economic subsidy in the history of the world with basically unlimited interest free loans from the US, known in common parlance as the Marshall Plan, or officially, the European Recovery Program.

Scotland will get nothing of the sort. Its economic success will be determined solely and entirely by the policy decisions of their untried politicians, and two things completely out of their control - the global economy, and oil prices and oil recovery technology and costs. they will start life with 70% debt:GDP, a 6.5% budget deficit, a completely virgin central bank with limited foreign currency reserves, and a decimated financial sector. so their politicians are going to have their work cut out.

[fa0019]

The Queen has invited the people of Scotland to think carefully about their decision, and the cybernats are already on her case, one on the Beeb suggesting that her comments "betray her Tory stance".

You couldn't make it up. The message is clear from the cybernats,  don't think carefully, whatever you do!

If I recall I've heard that the queen has always been a socialist at heart and her favourite PM was Harold Wilson who was so left MI5 thought he could have been a soviet spy.

Anyone who reads anything more is an idiot.

I was in Scotland for the commonwealths over the summer. When talking to a cabbie I mentioned David Cameron was Scottish via his Da. He couldn't believe me, thought it was impossible.... so I said, look it up. He's got little to no English blood in him. He was the first Cameron born in England.

[SecretFly]

I managed to grab a Scottish TV debate last night online. It was ridiculous. Some NHS doctor came up and asked the nationalists how will they deal with the 60 or so diseases which Scottish hospitals and doctors cannot deal with? These people are sent to England for treatment as they have nor the skills nor the capacity. How they struggle to recruit doctors and nurses in Scotland and can only supplement via persons from England and pay is far lower. How will they deal with that in an independent Scotland?

But this is a modern world, fa0019. Many regions of Europe specialise in one aspect of desease treatment, whilst others specialise in other aspects; and the movement of patients between Nations for specialist treatment is normal. What about the very prominent recent story where the parents of an English child wanted their son to get a specialist treatment abroad? English people go abroad to get certain treatments too.

[funnyExiledScot]

Secretfly, sounds like you agree with me regarding upfront costs to the nation of voting Yes. Don't you think the Separatists should be honest about it, say what you have and explain how Scotland will pay for it? Tax rises, more borrowing?

On the one hand they promise a new politics, and yet they peddle the worst kind of promise what you can't deliver politics. Nothing at all new about the SNP. Corrupt, hypocritical, bullying and small minded. There are good arguments for independence, but this whole notion of a left wing socially just utopia forming in Scotland is horse Poopie.

[fa0019]

I managed to grab a Scottish TV debate last night online. It was ridiculous. Some NHS doctor came up and asked the nationalists how will they deal with the 60 or so diseases which Scottish hospitals and doctors cannot deal with? These people are sent to England for treatment as they have nor the skills nor the capacity. How they struggle to recruit doctors and nurses in Scotland and can only supplement via persons from England and pay is far lower. How will they deal with that in an independent Scotland?

But this is a modern world, fa0019.  Many regions of Europe specialise in one aspect of desease treatment, whilst others specialise in other aspects; and the movement of patients between Nations for specialist treatment is normal.  What about the very prominent recent story where the parents of an English child wanted their son to get a specialist treatment abroad?  English people go abroad to get certain treatments too.

Yeah I know the case.

It had zero to do with the care for the actual child medically. It was less intensive side affects yet not proven to be as affective as current methodology so its not been signed off in the UK.

As mentioned earlier not an expert but both my parents and my siblings are NHS lifers and after speaking with them who are in these fields they said it wasn't about care and they parents STILL HAVE TO PAY FOR THE TREATMENT OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKET. Treatment which is long term less affective at least proven.

You see it all the time in the NHS. Some parent looks up on the internet and somehow they are an expert... its like these specialists just forgot to get the memo on the new treatment right??? My da once had to go to give evidence in court after he gave permission for social services to take away a new baby from her mum who was HIV positive, refused her meds and refused to not breastfeed... putting huge risks on the child.... and it was all down to some phoney article the dad had read on the internet.... and it still got a court hearing (which was obviously crushed in seconds with the judge asking how it even got this far).

I have to say when my son has been ill first thing I do is go on the internet and you find crazy things... oh no he has this, oh actually he has a cold.

[SecretFly]

Germany is a bad example SF. They benefited from the largest international economic subsidy in the history of the world with basically unlimited interest free loans from the US, known in common parlance as the Marshall Plan, or officially, the European Recovery Program.

Correct - and I've often quoted that truth as Germany in the present day sneers at the little countries that were caught up in the recent finanical meltdown and were forced to cough up all the money they 'owed'.  

Yes, the Marshall Plan saved Germany from oblivion...................... but why?

Firstly, my point remains that Germany were in a much worse - much much worse state than Scotland now is or will remotely be in should they choose Independence.  So, if Germany came back so strong, Scotland, on a much smaller level and at such a already healthy level, should sustain themselves comfortably enough in the long term.

But back to the point.  Why did the Marshall plan offer the olive branch to a despised nation?  Because in the long run it was absolutley considered essential that the mistakes of the past weren't committed again (ie, the depravations of the Weimer republic of post WW1 that brought to power Hitler himself)  Germany needed to be made viable again for two reasons - the security of Europe from within (to kill the desire for another Reich in harshly treated people) and the security of Europe from the external threat (USSR)

So it was very much vested selfish self-interest that led to the Marshall plan.  And I say that's what will happen if Scotland vote Yes.  England and the rest of the UK will relaise where self-interest rests, and they'll cooperate with Scotland to form a mutually beneficial area of commerce and security.  The gloom sayers know that England can't afford to make an example of Scotland by playing hard-hard ball with them.  It's in everyone's interests that they don't.

[fa0019]

Germany is a bad example SF. They benefited from the largest international economic subsidy in the history of the world with basically unlimited interest free loans from the US, known in common parlance as the Marshall Plan, or officially, the European Recovery Program.

Correct - and I've often quoted that truth as Germany in the present day sneers at the little countries that were caught up in the recent finanical meltdown and were forced to cough up all the money they 'owed'.  

Yes, the Marshall Plan saved Germany from oblivion...................... but why?

Firstly, my point remains that Germany were in a much worse - much much worse state than Scotland now is or will remotely be in should they choose Independence.  So, if Germany came back so strong, Scotland, on a much smaller level and at such a already healthy level, should sustain themselves comfortably enough in the long term.

But back to the point.  Why did the Marshall plan offer the olive branch to a despised nation?  Because in the long run it was absolutley considered essential that the mistakes of the past weren't committed again (ie, the depravations of the Weimer republic of post WW1 that brought to power Hitler himself)  Germany needed to be made viable again for two reasons - the security of Europe from within (to kill the desire for another Reich in harshly treated people) and the security of Europe from the external threat (USSR)

So it was very much vested selfish self-interest that led to the Marshall plan.  And I say that's what will happen if Scotland vote Yes.  England and the rest of the UK will relaise where self-interest rests, and they'll cooperate with Scotland to form a mutually beneficial area of commerce and security.  The gloom sayers know that England can't afford to make an example of Scotland by playing hard-hard ball with them.  It's in everyone's interests that they don't.

Germany had 80MM people to fall back onto, long term deposits of fuel, a huge academic service industry and yes whilst they did have to press the reset button, they knew and we knew once they got back up speed (about 25 years) they were back in their old position again.

Scotland is basing their entire plan on Oil and FS. The rest is chicken feed.

Oil according to the Wood Report (which Salmond endorses) will be gone by 2050 (so 35 years).

A FS industry which has stated will leave in droves for England.. and they will. Yes there will be firms that have a presence in Scotland but they will be tiny in comparison. Much smaller as firms will rather than market themselves to 65MM, they will market themselves to 6MM... those with a majority rUK interest will move or stay in rUK. Their will be no attraction for firms to move north regardless of the 3% cut in CT.... not when their suggested rate of 17% is still well short of that of Ireland at 12%... with the same benefits to firms (English speaking, educated, within 1hrs flight of London).

Scotland will have their own currency, that is inevitable, but with huge debt, little assets and no big FS firms to pick up the pieces they won't be able to weather the storm like countries like the rUK, France and Germany can.  They won't be Germany, they will be like Greece, Iceland, Ireland.

Ireland sees  50,000 youngsters leaving every year it has a continuous brain drain of the best and brightest. That is Scotland's future.

[LordDowlais]

Well, I am Welsh, so I do not really have any say on this, although I would be sad to see our Scottish Brethren leave, but the more I listen to this the more a YES vote does not make sense, I stayed up till the wee hours the other night watching a debate on it, when the YES campaigners were questioned how they would do things, they didn't even answer properly, I honestly do not think that they are thinking whilst taking the emotion out of being independent, the things they will lose will be massive, and it's little things, I now it is petty, but what TV stations will they have ? They will not be allowed to have the BBC, would they ? Who is going to carry on coughing up for the cost of the commonwealth games ? Who is going to pay for all their infrastructure, railways, road maintenance, public buses, schools, NHS ? Also, and this should be the clincher, the X-Factor would no longer be going to the Scottish capital anymore.

[AsLongAsBut100ofUs]

it's little things, I now it is petty, but what TV stations will they have ?

The same as now

They will not be allowed to have the BBC, would they ?

Yes, they would, altho would have to pay for it, as for example, rte in Ireland currently does

Who is going to carry on coughing up for the cost of the commonwealth games ?

Scotland already competes separately to England in the Commonwealth Games (as does Wales) and has to find its own budget for that already - so no change there

Who is going to pay for all their infrastructure, railways, road maintenance, public buses, schools, NHS ?

Scotland sends more tax revenue south of the border than it gets spending power back, so there would in fact be more to go around

Also, and this should be the clincher, the X-Factor would no longer be going to the Scottish capital anymore.

Hmm, no comment

[fa0019]

Well, I am Welsh, so I do not really have any say on this, although I would be sad to see our Scottish Brethren leave, but the more I listen to this the more a YES vote does not make sense, I stayed up till the wee hours the other night watching a debate on it, when the YES campaigners were questioned how they would do things, they didn't even answer properly, I honestly do not think that they are thinking whilst taking the emotion out of being independent, the things they will lose will be massive, and it's little things, I now it is petty, but what TV stations will they have ? They will not be allowed to have the BBC, would they ? Who is going to carry on coughing up for the cost of the commonwealth games ? Who is going to pay for all their infrastructure, railways, road maintenance, public buses, schools, NHS ? Also, and this should be the clincher, the X-Factor would no longer be going to the Scottish capital anymore.

Just think a future Michelle McManus or Darius Denesh won't be able to trash our name anymore!!!!

[LordDowlais]

Well, I am Welsh, so I do not really have any say on this, although I would be sad to see our Scottish Brethren leave, but the more I listen to this the more a YES vote does not make sense, I stayed up till the wee hours the other night watching a debate on it, when the YES campaigners were questioned how they would do things, they didn't even answer properly, I honestly do not think that they are thinking whilst taking the emotion out of being independent, the things they will lose will be massive, and it's little things, I now it is petty, but what TV stations will they have ? They will not be allowed to have the BBC, would they ? Who is going to carry on coughing up for the cost of the commonwealth games ? Who is going to pay for all their infrastructure, railways, road maintenance, public buses, schools, NHS ? Also, and this should be the clincher, the X-Factor would no longer be going to the Scottish capital anymore.

Just think a future Michelle McManus or Darius Denesh won't be able to trash our name anymore!!!!

What about Britians Got Tallent, they would lose that as well, no more Susan Boyle either.

[Jimpy]

"Scotland sends more tax revenue south of the border than it gets spending power back, so there would in fact be more to go around"

Not when you're self funding for everything it isn't.

[fa0019]

Who is going to pay for all their infrastructure, railways, road maintenance, public buses, schools, NHS ?

Scotland sends more tax revenue south of the border than it gets spending power back, so there would in fact be more to go around

[/quote]

That is highly contentious and at the best they are barely even. Even if true is only because Scotland won a mini lottery in oil deposits which is almost run out. So because they have 35 years of a product they should be independent for evermore?

Firms can base themselves in Edinburgh because they are still in the UK and market themselves to the 65MM people in the country. Once independent under different rules a firm has a choice... do they want to be in the nation of their biggest market/clients or not? Then they will ask themselves can Scotland weather storms as well as rUK can? They will be pragmatic and in a rational argument they will choose to relocate, relocate their head office first off, then over time where they conduct their business, where their operations are and the clients they serve.

[fa0019]

It reminds me of the astrazenca takeover bid by Pfizer a while back.

Pfizer said they would guarantee jobs for 5 years in England... it was a terrible statement and everyone knew those guys would jump the minute things got better in the USA. Same with Scotland and the FS firms. JOBS WILL GO, and like the thatcher years, the jobs which go will not be replaced.

So you are a fund manager huh? hmm, no jobs there I'm afraid but how about working at the tunnocks factory? Slightly less pay but hey you're free.

[LordDowlais]

it's little things, I now it is petty, but what TV stations will they have ?

 The same as now

They will not be allowed to have the BBC, would they ?

 Yes, they would, altho would have to pay for it, as for example, rte in Ireland currently does

Who is going to carry on coughing up for the cost of the commonwealth games ?

Scotland already competes separately to England in the Commonwealth Games (as does Wales) and has to find its own budget for that already - so no change there

Who is going to pay for all their infrastructure, railways, road maintenance, public buses, schools, NHS ?

Scotland sends more tax revenue south of the border than it gets spending power back, so there would in fact be more to go around

Also, and this should be the clincher, the X-Factor would no longer be going to the Scottish capital anymore.

Hmm, no comment

We are all sill paying for the commonwealth games with British Tax payers money, and are you sure you send more money in tax than you get back, I am going to have to try and check that, you just sound like the rest of the YES campaigners saying things without really answering them, also how are you going to pay to keep watching the BBC programmes ? There other things to pay for as well, who is going to pay all your new politicians ? Who is going to pay for all your local councils ? Who is going to fund your armies, and defence e.c.t, the mind just boggles, but hey ho, all the best to you

[fa0019]

LD, "As long as" isn't Scottish or at least I didn't think you were???

[RuggerRadge2611]

LD, "As long as" isn't Scottish or at least I didn't think you were???

As Long As is a Scot, and a very passionate one at that.

I suppose my feelings on it are the Indy oppertunity is 30 years too late or 10 years too soon.

30 Years too late because 30 years ago we could have set up an oil fund like Norway and been a true powerhouse in these Islands with a fantastic working relationship with the rUK.

10 years too soon because we are making too many demands of the rUK to .do it this time around


Arguments for paitence :

[A] We can strengthen our position under devomax.

[B] we could buy back RBS/HBOS or even both back from UK taxpayers for iScotland to use as a central bank

[C] Save up enough Oil and other Assets through canny investment and sensible spending to have enough assets to float our own currency and use either RBS or HBOS as a central bank thus removeing the need the need to share the £ with the rUK. This will help in our application to join the EU

[D] rUK can be in a position to wean themselves off the need to support themselves on the oil revenues and thus better prepare themselves for seperation.

Simple truth is despite what the YES campaign say Scotland isn't ready for idnependence at the moment. We won't be in any kind of position to make demands of the rUK and IMO we should wait untill we are.

The gaps between what Mr Salmond is promising and what he'll actually be able to deliver is absolutely mind boggling. Just 2 without free trade with the EU will see us in a depression the likes of which many in Scotland will never have seen.

[Sponsored content]