BS: scottish independence

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Scabby Douglas
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 09:27 AM

Schweik, I'm afraid there's nothing much anybody here can do to help you on what rights you have in Ireland. Those are Irish rules.

If it helps, if you had moved to Scotland early enough to register, you could have voted in the Scottish referendum.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Scabby Douglas
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 09:15 AM

Wait, Musket, wait. You're saying that Alex Salmond can't win without "lying, cheating and threatening". You've defined, in your own mind, that it's the only understandable way for independence to be achieved. Therefore, if there is a Yes vote tomorrow, then you already know how it will have been achieved: lying, cheating and threats. Lovely circular reasoning.

There are plenty of lies being told, much threatening, and attempts to cheat. But most of them are emanating from the No campaign.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: The Sandman
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 09:13 AM

yes, but i as an englishman living in ireland am not allowed to vote on irsh referendums or whether ireland should have agreed to the lisbon treaty or on matters of the irish constitution or abortion, following this logic germans or other europeans resident in scotland should not be allowed to vote, so much for democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 08:49 AM

But if you are not careful, you end up with the Irish national football team when Jack Charlton was manager. Full of English and Welsh players, on the basis your Grandma owned an Irish Wolfhound.

Of course Salmond was gerrymandering when carving up the criteria. He can't get a yes from the good people of Scotland without lying, cheating and threatening, so for an idealist like him, the end justifies the means.

A bit like when Yasser Arafat was caught lying and he said it is OK to lie in order to achieve your aims. Achieving your aims is your focus.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 08:44 AM

I'm not suggesting its not simple and fair. It's admirably simple, and it would have been impossible to decide who outside Scotland would be eligible. It would also be difficult, if not unlawful, to exclude Scottish residents who were not 'Scottish'. So no gripes about that.

However it is naive to believe that Salmond didn't think very carefully before agreeing who and who should not be franchised. He's a very wily and skillful politician. From Salmond's point of view the 'foreign' vote is low-risk. I also doubt he would have allowed 16 year olds to vote if we wasn't confident most of them would vote Yes.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 08:39 AM

I agree with that, Scabby Douglas.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Scabby Douglas
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 08:13 AM

It's astounding that we're still rehashing this question of who should have the vote. It's perfectly simple and fair. If people have moved away from Scotland - to the extent of no longer being resgistered to vote in Scottish elections - then they don't get a vote.

If people, wherever they are from, are registered to vote in Scotland, then they get a vote. And bear in mind the biggest group of non-Scottish-born voters eligible to vote in the referendum are actually *English* - about 370,000.

How could being born in Scotland entitle anyone to a vote?
It's nothing to do with gerrymandering of the electorate, as Howard Jones implies. It's about steering the fairest possible way through a problematic process.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 07:20 AM

The comment about remaining in the EU is surprising, as everyone apart from Salmond is saying Scotland will automatically leave the EU and will have to reapply. This would take years. The Spanish PM has repeated his opposition, and a survey has shown that most European businesses aren't bothered whether or not Scotland leaves, which suggests they won't be pushing for it to be readmitted.

As for foreigners having a vote, I suspect Salmond's strategy is that residents in Scotland with no British allegiance are more likely to vote for independence.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Stu
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 07:11 AM

"more than just a bit puzzled that Germans and other foreigners have the right to vote in that decision"

It's nothing to do with ethnicity, it's whether you're resident in the country that counts.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Wolfgang
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 06:54 AM

About 10,000 Germans living in Scotland will have the right to vote for or against Scottish independence. That's why we can read in our press how they will vote and, more interesting, why they will vote with yes or no. Two opinions:

One woman with a small export oriented business will vote with YES because she thinks Scottish independence makes it more likely that Scotland will stay in the EU and that will help her business.

One young man (could be tongue in cheek, but that was difficult to say from just reading his words): In the few years I am living here I got so fed up with the Scottish always moaning and whining that everything that's bad is the fault of the English that I am voting YES just not to be forced to listen to that complaint any longer.

Wolfgang (more than just a bit puzzled that Germans and other foreigners have the right to vote in that decision)

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 17 Sep 14 - 04:05 AM

I wonder how many have ignored the political nonsense and found the facts for themselves.

ONS and treasury figures concur that grouping all public spending, Scotland spends just over £1,200 per head of population than the combined rest of The UK.

It isn't hard. Verifiable audited accounts. You can google them and with five mins and a pocket calculator see it for yourself.

So, if more is spent on social infrastructure, where is it going? SNP have control of spending it, so what are they doing with it, and what difference would the other 2% make if they controlled the lot?

By following nationalistic dreams, the idiots have divided a nation. The UK will feel divided regardless of the outcome. Scotland will feel divided regardless of the outcome.

Well done Salmond. I assume your grandfather fought against repugnant nationalism in the same war my father did?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 06:51 PM

And now we see the worst and lowest form of brownshirt menace being wheeled out by the Yes campagne. Is it any wonder the English are fast coming around to my way of thinking, that we should be given a vote whether we want Scotland?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 08:45 AM

The problem is, and no political posturing or even money is going to alter these two basic facts;

The health inequalities of Scotland are far greater than the rest of The UK. Whilst you can look at a council ward in say, New Town of Edinburgh and compare it to Tower Hamlets or Middlesborough favourably, the overall health in Scotland is lower than the the overall health in England. Wales and NI are between the two.

Whilst policy and practice can help overcome this long term, it is a generational issue.

The other huge cost for much of Scotland is rurality. There are high cost small patient number services based out of Elgin as an example that a district general hospital in England with three times the served population wouldn't be viable to provide. The Royal Colleges are concerned that some consultants do not see enough cases to keep up to date with practice.

The NHS is a bit of a red herring here in this debate because the Scottish system is organised, run and governed under Scottish law and always has been. There are huge differences between how each country within The UK provide NHS care. An independent Scotland would be subject to the same Royal College guidelines, NICE and accreditation. Regulatory bodies such as GMC, NMC etc would remain as they are in an independent Scotland, as no doctor would wish to train where their training and experience was not recognised. This has been acknowledged by the Scottish government.

I was at a Royal Medical Society dinner in Edinburgh recently and there is huge concern that continuity is not enough. The universities are concerned they might not attract medical students as they do hitherto and consultants are considering how peer group and clinical networks will be affected, making the lack of doctors even more acute.

At present, the spending per head in Scotland is higher than the UK average, and the call on that is also higher.

There are legitimate concerns over NHS Scotland regardless of the vote, and neither camp is in a position to make the problems go away.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 08:10 AM

So the Scottish NHS is safe in the hands of the YeSNP is it? Vote YES to protect the Scottish NHS Jowly & Co spouted:

NHS Scotland SNP Generated Funding Gap £450 million

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 06:35 AM

Well, I suppose that after David Beckham gave a view it was only a matter of time before the sage advice of naval cooks got everybody to stop and think.

Greasy food. The effects of which make the cost of health and social care in Scotland almost untenable.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Stu
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 06:16 AM

"I did not realise reading some of these posts that England was a colonial power in Scotland"

There's a fair bit of revisionist thinking going on at present on both sides. It seems insane that our current politics are defined by the actions of Norman-descended aristocracy in the middle ages. The imposition of the Hanoverians and current incumbents Saxe-Coburg and Gotha wrankles as much as the rule of the Normans and Plantagents, but then it does across these islands, including England, where we're still under the Yoke as well. Everyone on these islands have been fucked over by our the toffs for a thousand years.

The Scots were willing and vital participants in empire (Edinburgh is the most imperial city I've ever been in, even more so than London in some ways), with all the good and bad that role brings with it. The Scots were a huge part of the enlightenment and were an intellectual powerhouse that stood alongside England and Wales as they made their presence felt across the globe.

The real struggle here is the ordinary, working people of these islands who have lost their lands in clearances, plantation and enclosure, who have organised to secure their rights only to see them destroyed by the piggies with their snouts in the trough and their political shills, who stood side by side and suffered the horrors of war started by over privileged royal scumballs, fascistic madmen or the oil-obsessed, lying poltroons that are modern politicians of all countries and creed.

Expect history to be re-written again and again during the coming years, especially if after the result either way recriminations and blame instead of progress become the new way.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 05:44 AM

Akenaton a word of advice for your young friend:

No matter how well qualified you think you are if there is a job then take take it - a job is a job and work experience is work experience - It is far better for you to work than sit at home and sponge off your parents and the State - It is called having a "Work Ethic" Akenaton, something that is apparently a "foreign concept".

Pray tell us how voting YES will deliver a new life to this young man?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 04:53 AM

Alex. You have given your name and location on these threads many times.

I have asked The SNP if they support your claim that their party leader doesn't give a damn about equality and is manipulating the press whilst having an agenda far more in tune with your own odious views.

You said that on this thread and as you claim to know Mr Salmond and be a member of his party it is quite legitimate to ask if they wish to disown your comments. The link to this thread I gave to The Scotsman newspaper was in the same manner.

For all your crap about being stalked, you are the one who upsets gay Mudcat members with your criminal homophobia and lies.

Payback time, sick puppy.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: selby
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 04:49 AM

I did not realise reading some of these posts that England was a colonial power in Scotland. I thought the whole UK through thick and thin stuck it out for good or bad together.
With a Scotish Grandmother I have always had a strong affinity with Scotland but listening to some of the petulant spoiled child statements been made I feel nothing but sadness that a proud and well respect family member is behaving this way and now feel, go as you as a independent country and your elected representatives bring nothing to the table. This is not about party politics this is about your future and I am afraid some of you do not get it, you give the impression that when it turns bad for you the rest of the UK will go oh come back we still love you unfortunately we wont. Sadly I feel that your Yes parties behavior makes many people in the rest of the UK not wish to be a good friend to Scotland. You seem to forget there is a whole country indeed the whole world look at you and your leadership does not present Scotland in a positive light.
Keith

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 04:20 AM

Akenaton, my own sons here in England are in a similar position. It may have escaped your notice, but we are coming through a global recession. Have you thought how much worse it would have been had Scotland already been independent and could not turn to the British Government to bail out RBS and the other failed Scottish financial institutions?

Self-determination is an illusion in a global economy. Even the UK does not have full self-determination, it is constrained by formal political relationships and informal global and economic pressures. However as a larger entity it is in a stronger position. Scotland seems to think it can turn in on itself and be unaffected by outside factors. In particular, Scotland cannot avoid being affected by the RUK economy but will have given up any say in it.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 04:06 AM

Guest, it's not the English flag that song refers to but the British one. Scotland profited from the British Empire just as much, perhaps more, than other parts of Britain, and to this day Scottish engineering can be found in the remotest corners of the globe. Scots were at the forefront of developing and ruling the Empire. So don't try to claim some kind of moral superiority for Scotland, you were as culpable as we were for its excesses and mistakes.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 03:44 AM

Not much point in refuting all that Teribus, most of it is simply your take on things.

Since the start of the campaign, I have been shocked by the numbers of intelligent young people who simply have no chance of a well paid job.
The only jobs available are short hours and low pay, with no prospects of advancement.

One young chap had written dozens of job applications, finally went to America on an exchange scheme, loved it, but had to return in 3 months under the scheme rules, now back on benefits which do not support him and living with his parents.
This young man is highly intelligent, but says there are hundreds in his position....he is voting yes, not to protect his wealth, but to get a life.

As they say Mr T, ..."yer tea's oot!!".....On Friday we will know if the future is in the hands of our youth of this country, or the wealthy pensioners, bankers, and industrialists, who contributed so much to the failure of our economy.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Sep 14 - 02:54 AM

1: " I can tell you how most of the NOs are deciding Bill.

Most come from the well off semi retired, early retired demographic, or simply settled into a comfortable lifestyle and not wishing to rock the boat.   It is a purely selfish mindset,"

Ehmmmmm No Akenaton, you are wrong both in describing the group you refer to as the "NOs" and in attributing a motive for them being "No" voters. The YES camp is based in emotion and fairy stories, on a number of occasions during the campaign senior SNP figures have been caught out telling lie after lie, lies in fact that were so blatant that they did not even stand up to even cursory examination. Thus marks the stamp of those you wish to see lead and govern our country - you might trust in the word of Jowly Eck & Co I certainly do not.

So NO voters do not wish to rock the boat eh? I think that those you describe will the ones asked to pay through the nose to fund Scotland's little "Marxist" Utopia, if you doubt that then I think that you should check up on the number of Scottish Tax payers who are net contributors to the Exchequer (~40%, if indeed that high) - and the prospect of funding this doomed project is what makes them NO voters.

2: "There are huge areas of deprivation in Scotland, youth unemployment is rife, and those who are employed are on short term, short hours, dead end jobs.
They have no future just measly benefits that would hardly keep a young man or woman.
We need control of the wealth we produce, to train our young folk, inspire them out of their torpor."

Who have the electorate in all these areas of utter deprivation voted for since Keir Hardy was a bairn Akenaton? Since the end of the Second World War that Party has been in power as the National Government for as long as their political opponents, while in civic government they have had a clear run almost for that entire time - Tell me what good has it done those who voted for them? Who do you think they are going to vote for now? Something different or will they go for the "same old" - if the latter they can expect the same result whether that is in a Scottish Parliament or one based in Westminster. Pin a red rosette on a donkey in Glasgow and it will get elected, that is the political nouse and understanding of the voter.

The Scottish Parliament "socialist" in nature since 1999 has had the power to raise tax in Scotland by 3%, a power granted under devolution, yet not once has it been used - care to tell me why this source of revenue was not used at the insistence of Scottish Members of Parliament to alleviate all this deprivation Akenaton? These of course will be same MPs that will be standing for election to any Parliament of an independent Scotland won't they?

Your argument that if Scotland had control of its entire income things would be different are a bit hollow - the wankers in the SNP haven't even costed out what independence will cost let alone worked out what they would view as how their promises to the electorate will be funded. As Members of the Scottish Parliament they were I presume elected to do whatever was necessary to look after the best interests of both the people and the nation of Scotland - Since 1999 they have failed miserably - I do not see any prospect of, or have any confidence in, them improving that track record.

3: Your empty phrases such as:

"We need control of the wealth we produce, to train our young folk, inspire them out of their torpor."

AND

"National pride may be anathema to some here but its all we have left to change our young people from hopeless cases into contributing, fulfilled citizens of the new Scotland."

Are a complete and utter joke, they can't be bothered to get out of bed to look for even the most basic of jobs, which they would do if either they or their parents had any sort of "work ethic", but there again why should they, they can get more on benefits than they can working.

So rather than rattle out empty phrases Akenaton give us some details as to how it would be done, how much it would cost, who would pay for it. But like a true "socialist" it is all too easy just to sit back and blame others - well as that is what you are doing then blame the right people - those you have elected to the Scottish Parliament at Holyrood since 1999 - they have had the power since that date and they have consistently failed to use it.

4: "Out of NATO, ban WDMs, get back to being a proud trading nation."

After getting out of NATO and banishing WDMs [sic] Who is it that you are going to trade with? 80% of Scotland's trade is with the rest of the UK who you will just have pissed off mightily. For Scotland's former customers in the rest of the UK trade with Scotland, being a non-EU member, will instantly become more expensive. So it will be in the best interest of those companies to find alternative suppliers either in the UK itself or elsewhere within the EU, that they will do in the interim period between the 19th September 2014 and the 24th March 2016.

In that interim period should a YES vote be returned on Friday all five of Scotland's Banks will shift their registered offices South and they will then shift their operations South as well, they will not leave thousands of personnel up in an independent Scotland where they will have to pay tax, in the best interests of the UK Treasury those jobs and that tax revenue will be brought South - doubt that then take a good look at who is RBS's biggest shareholder - The Treasury will call the shots and RBS will do as it is told.

Standard Life (90% of its business is in England) they will do the same, as will the likes of Aegon and Brewin Dolphin - Scotland's financial sector will be destroyed.

Scotland's GDP estimated at US$269 billion for this year will shrink dramatically in the interim as the flight of jobs, capital and people make itself felt.

Musket is perfectly correct Jowly's mantra on every pre-referendum promise will be - Sorry but I tried

Predictions by experts are that the economies of both independent Scotland and the UK will take a hit if the Union is dissolved. In the first five years both economies will decline the UK's much less than Scotland', in the following five the UK's economy will have recovered but Scotland's will continue to decline.

Prats like Jim Sillars threatening businesses with a "day of reckoning" don't help the independence cause one iota.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,.garglyle
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 09:24 PM

How long will it take for the counting of absentee ballots?

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

The five Scott's I know are ex-pats living in three different countries.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 08:21 PM

Posting another song, Wolftone's version, to sort of go along with Stu's Diggers song:

(My Ancestry: Irish-Scots-Welsh-English, one American Indian)


Where is the flag of England? Go North, South, East or West. Wherever there's wealth to plunder or land to be possessed. Wherever there's feeble races to frighten, coerce or scare. You'll find the butcher's apron, the English flag is there!
It waits upon blazing hovels where African victims died, to be shot the explosive bullets or wretchedly starve and die, and where the pirate hammers the isles of southern seas, at the peak of the hellish vessel the English flag is free!
The Maori often cursed it with his bitterness dying breath, and the Arab hath hissed his hatred as he spat at its folds in death, and the helpless Hindu feared it, and the Kenyan did the same, and the Irish blood hath stained it, with a deep indelible stain.
Where is the flag of England? Go North, South, East or West. Wherever there's wealth to plunder or land to be possessed. Wherever there's feeble races to frighten, coerce or scare. You'll find the butcher's apron, the English flag is there!
It is floated on scenes of pillage, it is flaunted on deeds of shame. It has waved o'er fell marauders, as they ravished with sword and flame, it has looked upon on ruthless slaughter, and massacred dire and grim, and has heard the shrieks of victims drowning the jingo hymn.
Where is the flag of England? Seek lands where the natives rot. Where decay, and assured extinction must soon be a people's lot. Go search for once glad islands where death and disease are rife, and the greed of colossal commerce now fattens on human life.
Where is the flag of England? Go North, South, East or West. Wherever there's wealth to plunder or land to be possessed. Wherever there's feeble races to frighten, coerce or scare. You'll find the butcher's apron, the English flag is there!
Where is the flag of England? Go sail where rich boats come. With shoddy and loaded cottons, and beer and Bibles and guns. Go where brute forces triumphed, and hypocrisy makes its lair.        In your question you'll find the answer, it was and still is there!
Where is the flag of England? Go North, South, East or West. Wherever there's wealth to plunder or land to be possessed. Wherever there's feeble races to frighten, coerce or scare. You'll find the butcher's apron, the English flag is there.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 07:33 PM

If Scotland had complete independence, all revenues would go directly to the Scottish exchequer, there would be no need to raise ADDITIONAL taxes from the Scottish people.

A large part of these revenues at present are retained by the Westminster govt to fund High Speed Railways in England, and foreign Wars in Iraq, Libya, and soon, Syria.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 07:17 PM

If it's about money, the Scottish government already has had the power to vary tax rates, which it hasn't exercised, and more powers are already coming in.

Why haven't the Scottish people been insisting their government raise their taxes?

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 07:06 PM

Just a point for any mods who may wander this way, I am getting rather sick of being stalked by this sad person.

A few days ago on this thread he announced that he had access to my name and home address...how he obtained these I know not, as we appear to live at opposite ends of the UK.

However I think we could do without any of the abuse which appears to be his trade mark.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 04:02 PM

You're not a failure Al. I bet lots of people want your autograph!

A failure requires blaming others. The details might include, for instance, saying that those who vote differently to you don't deserve a vote because they are comfortable. Assuming anybody would be comfortable by anything an independent Scotland would offer them, presumably it would be their fault that Akenaton still gets upset by success, gay men, travellers, Scottish residents who weren't born there and anybody who doesn't share his corrupt outlook.

The little shit brings out the worst in me, that's all.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 04:00 PM

The answer Howard is money. Training programmes on a scale which Scotland requires need adequate finance.

The Barnet formula only give back to Scotland, a part of what Scotland contributes to the UK exchequer
The money has to be spread thinly over a huge range of social policies it is not infinite.

With control over our finances, we can bring forward policies that would never see the light of day under a Tory controlled government.

That is what we have to look forward to in the UK family....another 20 years of right wing rule....from ALL the UK parties.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 02:45 PM

Akenaton, you say "We need control of the wealth we produce, to train our young folk, inspire them out of their torpor." But aren't education and training, and economic development, already devolved? What would independence add that would make a difference?

This is a genuine question. So much of the discussion seems to have been about things which Scotland already controls, including the NHS. I'm puzzled by what difference independence is supposed to make, besides national pride (which I've never noticed any shortage of)

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 02:32 PM

i always wanted to be a bitter hate filled failure.....but godammit! musket - you're just so loveable...!

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 02:25 PM

It isn't selfish. It just means they got on with making a success of their lives instead of being a bitter hate filled failure.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 01:58 PM

Bill...."I really wonder about 'how' most are deciding."

Well I can tell you how most of the NOs are deciding Bill.

Most come from the well off semi retired, early retired demographic, or simply settled into a comfortable lifestyle and not wishing to rock the boat.   It is a purely selfish mindset, There are huge areas of deprivation in Scotland, youth unemployment is rife, and those who are employed are on short term, short hours, dead end jobs.
They have no future just measly benefits that would hardly keep a young man or woman.
We need control of the wealth we produce, to train our young folk, inspire them out of their torpor.
National pride may be anathema to some here but its all we have left to change our young people from hopeless cases into contributing, fulfilled citizens of the new Scotland.

Out of NATO, ban WDMs, get back to being a proud trading nation.
We have the BRAND, all we need is the will and the guts.
Vote AYE to make Scotland great.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 12:48 PM

i am english. i live in the republic of ireland, i would like to see an independent scotland.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 12:33 PM

the first thing they ought to do is remove that tax on whisky. then everybody would go up there and stock up.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 12:19 PM

As one who has a large Scottish ancestry, but no opinion on this decision, I really worry about the tendency toward a closely split vote. No matter what happens, many people are going to be angry/frustrated. I really wonder about 'how' most are deciding.

a metaphor using a Scottish icon

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Ed T
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 12:10 PM

"a federation of nation states would work, co-operating on currency"

It seems odd that a central nation would accept to have a currency without strong influence or control of the economic factors (which are broader than financial matters) that directly influence it. Using a currency to assist with trade and to base a currency on, such as some use the USA dollar, would likely be a different matter.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 10:44 AM

Good name for a band..

Pseudo Jock and the Chippy Whingers.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Stu
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 10:30 AM

The currency issue is a problem. I tackled my (tory) MP about it and he started foaming at the mouth, adamant there would be no currency union. But why should there be? The key word here is 'union' or 'shared'; it'll be a sodding huge whole in Scottish sovereignty if the BofE still dictates some economic policy. Have some balls Scotland and start afresh with a new currency.

A currency union would have to go to a referendum in rUK, and given Salmond's threat to lumber the poor of rUK with Scotland's share of the national debt (as it will be the poor who pay as usual) it's likely the vote would go against; the Scots are going to have a devil of a job persuading the ordinary working folk of rUK to underwrite their sovereign debt, the debut of a foreign country.

On the subject of oil, it's sad how quickly the kerching! of hydrocarbon dollars induces myopia in otherwise intelligent people. If Scotland is intend on wringing the North Sea of every drop of oil then we can kiss goodbye to any chance of preventing the worst consequences of global warning. Of course the Scots aren't alone in wallowing in the carbon mire with all the other troughers whilst the planet is tortured to death; they're about to frack the fuck out of England, but it exposes the lie in Scotland being any more progressive and forward-thinking than the rest of us. Never mind, our grandchildren can all suffer as one people.

Still, I'm massively in favour of independence. The Scots will be in charge of their own destiny, will no longer be "colonised by wankers" and will have to look inward to address their own failings or risk looking like mewling, petulant brats. The English have been doing that for years and look where we've ended up; a tilt to the right and the loss of our tending towards radicalism and social justice and equanimity. And you don't want to go there!

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 10:13 AM

When this all started, I didn't sense a great deal of interest down here. The view I came across most was "we'll be sorry to see you go but it is for the Scots to decide", and an expectation of an amicable and fairly pain-free divorce in the event of a "Yes".

The "Yes" campaign may have gone down well in Scotland but down here it has often come across as arrogant, nasty and based on misinformation. It may claim to be anti-Westminster rather than anti-English, but it doesn't feel like it. Salmond's sense of entitlement that we must give him whatever he asks for is not going down well this side of the border, especially as it begins to sink in that it's going to be expensive for us as well as for you, and that the ramifications are far wider than most of us had first assumed.

Scotland will quite rightly expect its representatives to negotiate hard for the best terms they can get. We will expect ours to do the same. It will not be pretty.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 10:00 AM

"It seems that half the Scots don't want to remain with us, and the other half will stay only if granted special terms and special privileges." - Howard Jones

Now I really would like you to explain how on earth you reached that point of view Howard knowing full well that there are those for, those against and those who are as yet undecided.

1: "It seems that half the Scots don't want to remain with us"

That is the "nationalist", or "separatist" view and they do not represent half by any stretch of the imagination.

2: "the other half will stay only if granted special terms and special privileges"

Utter nonsense among those who are happy with Union, who have always intended to vote NO, you will find the majority want no additional powers, special terms or privileges whatsoever - there are even quite an number would be only too pleased to see the idiotic Scottish Parliament disbanded as an utter waste of space, time, resources and money. Hell's teeth the useless bast**ds in Holyrood have clearly demonstrated over the past 15 years that they can't even be bothered to rouse themselves off their big, fat, useless backsides to use the powers they have let alone use any additional "powers".

The "Devo-Max" deal being offered is to try and seduce the more faint hearted "separatists" and the "undecideds" who might be leaning towards a YES vote.

I agree with you entirely when you say that irrespective of the outcome things will never be the same. Irrespective of the outcome England, Wales and Northern Ireland will still be a "united" United Kingdom, Scotland whether in or out of it come next Friday morning will be a nation riven apart, split into two camps sulking and waiting for the next round.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Musket
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 09:54 AM

Governments have to juggle priorities from the pot.

The bigger the pot, the better the risk pool.

Howard's point about hardening of attitudes is interesting. Assuming naivety is in abundance and there is independence, I notice that Salmond has said The Uk will have to negotiate currency union because he will have a mandate to do so from Scotland so they must.

Notwithstanding that no government has to give quarter to foreign politicians, I wonder how popular Salmond will be when a year in he says to the Scottish people;

1. To remain in NATO, the nuclear subs have to stay. Sorry, I tried.

2. We can't get currency union so The Uk will be setting our bank interest rates without discussing it with us first. Sorry I tried.

3. The exodus of finance, banks and large multinationals means we can't afford the free education, social infrastructure or anything else we promised. Sorry, I tried.

4. As an independent Scotland, we rely on the rest of the UK, but no longer have any control or influence over it. Sorry, I tried.

5. Oh, and they won't have us back. Sorry, I tried.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 09:54 AM

"a federation of nation states would work, co-operating on currency"

Like the Eurozone, you mean? Good luck with that.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 09:14 AM

The NO case is just not viable....if we are one family(UK), why should one part of that family(Scotland) be "promised" special privileges, why should we continue to have free education for our children, free care for the elderly, free prescriptions, council tax freeze etc, when the rest of the family do not?

If I was English or Welsh, I would be protesting vigorously.

Does it not make you think that Westminster must have a bloody good reason for holding on to the country that they like to present as a basket case, a country that is unable to run its own affairs, that cant be trusted with a shared currency, a country from which the leaders of industry cant wait to escape?

Its all fucking lies....Scotland is wealthy and we have not yet had every ounce of national pride kicked out of us......Aye we are a hard lot, but we love our ain country, its songs, its poetry, the guts and determination of Scots folk.
We love the English to..... the nation they were before dilution and their rulers starved bullied and brainwashed them!
Take Stu's advice, grow some balls, stand on your own feet, a federation of nation states would work, co-operating on currency, and must other "issues"
Vote AYE and hold yer heid up high!

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 08:59 AM

You're absolutely right, Howard, Scotland thinks it only has to sulk and it'll get its way. They're putting themselves in a position where they'll be dependent on goodwill from RUK to get anything, goodwill which will be in remarkably short supply. Two lovely black eyes, two lovely black eyes, only for telling DC he was wrong, two lovely mince pies. Thankfully they've already got a cage in Glsgow zoo for the laddie, with them he'll look like a panda, perhaps they'll be able to claim he's the offspring and charge to see him, it's about the only way he'll make a significant contribnution to the economy.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Howard Jones
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 08:37 AM

Considering how high passions are running, and how many people both inside and outside Scotland are engaged in the debate, the reluctance of both sides to engage with the difficult issues is disappointing.

The "Yes" side has seemed reluctant to admit that independence means separation - not just from Westminster but from everything else. In many cases that will have significant effects and significant costs. The "Yes"es response has been to accuse anyone who points this out as either liars or bullies. It may be possible to mitigate these effects if both sides can negotiate ways of dealing with them, but the assurance that everyone will simply accept whatever Scotland demands, on the pound and EU membership for example, when those who will decide have said categorically they will not, is simply delusional.

The "No" campaign has been dire. The Union is probably not going to set Scottish pulses racing the way Scotland the Brave and Braveheart can, but the "No"'s message seems to come from Hilaire Belloc: "Always keep a-hold of Nurse, for fear of finding something worse". Even that has been appallingly managed.

As an Englishman, I find it disorienting to discover that the country I have lived in for 60 years isn't what I thought. It seems that half the Scots don't want to remain with us, and the other half will stay only if granted special terms and special privileges. Whatever the outcome, things won't be the same. I sense there will be a hardening of attitudes towards Scotland, with less willingness to be generous in negotiating separation terms if the "Yes"es win than I'd expected when this process started. If the vote is "No" and Scotland gets even more devolved powers, I think the expectation will be that you will have to pay for them all yourselves.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Stu
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 04:04 AM

Now Brenda's getting involved. She really ought to keep her overprivileged mouth shut on political issues.

The parcel of rogues lining up to endorse the union is enough to make the most hardened voter want to vote yes I imagine. If I had people like Farage, Cameron, Clegg, Campbell etc telling me we're better together I'd be off like a shot. Can't they see they're part of the problem?

The fact they can't make a coherent, passionate case for the union says it all; the union was fine for managing empire, but it's caved under pressure from stateless multinationals (see the TTIP deal that's about to erode our sovereignty further) and now is not fit for purpose. If we had a federation of home nations, each nation having devolved powers and it's own First Minister (with the English parliament situate outside London's reality distortion field) then that would be progress.

C'mon Scotland. Vote yes.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: Teribus
Date: 15 Sep 14 - 03:28 AM

"The Bedroom Tax alone shows what the Cameron/Clegg/Farage/Miliband clique want to do to Scotland if they get the chance." -Jack Campin

What "Bedroom Tax" are you talking about Jack? Could you please explain it to me - I ask because I have unoccupied spare bedrooms and I am not paying a penny on any of them.

Subject: RE: BS: scottish independence
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 14 Sep 14 - 11:36 AM

Oh, they've already cornered the market in curling stones. Somebody forgot to tell Salmond that women use tongs.