Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5
Discussion
Axionknight said:
On the Facebook page Oil & Gas people today the yes response was largely positive, it seems no matter what niche you dive into or area you conduct your polls in, the answer is deeply divided.
I'll be voting not, I'm English, I live near Aberdeen, it isn't a matter of "us n' them", after all I've shacked myself up with a Scottish lassie (a Teuchter, actually, if that is how you spell it, lol), it is just that the Yes vote has not answered enough of the important questions in my eyes. They simply have not put forward a strong enough case to sway my vote but make no mistake, if they had have, I would have voted yes - I live here, work here, have a partner here, own a house here and we intend to have a family here, I would vote in what I felt were the interests of myself and a future family of mine, and the Yes vote has not convinced me.
Yep, I commented on that too. Interesting (and very worrying) how narrow-minded and short-termist most of the 'yes' voters are - they actually believe Scotland pays in more than it gets back, how Westminster has ruined Scotland (WTF?), and how we are paying for all this English infrastructure from Scottish money, as if we are some form of golden goose that sh*ts black gold which is then swallowed up by those Tories down South...I'll be voting not, I'm English, I live near Aberdeen, it isn't a matter of "us n' them", after all I've shacked myself up with a Scottish lassie (a Teuchter, actually, if that is how you spell it, lol), it is just that the Yes vote has not answered enough of the important questions in my eyes. They simply have not put forward a strong enough case to sway my vote but make no mistake, if they had have, I would have voted yes - I live here, work here, have a partner here, own a house here and we intend to have a family here, I would vote in what I felt were the interests of myself and a future family of mine, and the Yes vote has not convinced me.
The level of ignorance on display is amazeballs, but then again it is Bookface..
Edinburger said:
They have a dual primary listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and the London Stock Exchange, and HSBC was founded in London in 1991 by the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation to act as a new group holding company. The origins of the bank lie in Hong Kong and Shanghai, where branches were first opened in 1865.
Anyway, my point is that it's unfair to compare them with RBS et al for that reason.
This is silly, none of that makes them any less British or any less of a player in the UK. Like it or not they have a massive presence in the here. The big differences between HSBC and RBS are:Anyway, my point is that it's unfair to compare them with RBS et al for that reason.
1. They are much bigger
2. They haven't indulged in crazy deals like ABN Amro
3. They haven't come anywhere near to bankruptcy
4. They haven't had to be bailed out by the public purse
5. They aren't now majority owned by HMG.
If you are going to compare the two it is hard to think of a positive measure on which HSBC doesn't outrank RBS with ease.
andymadmak said:
It will be interesting to see what happens after the NO vote. I am predicting that it WILL be a no, but by a narrower margin than is desirable. - probably 60/40. If I am right about that, then i would fully expect 20 years of whining and victim badge waving by the SNP and its supporters leading to another vote in the mid 2030s. I think that one could well be a yes vote.
I would also predict that the British Government will be thinking along similar lines, and that being the case, you can expect it to be planning for that vote by progressively pulling stuff back south of the border. Public sector jobs will progressivlely be moved south. Expect BAE to reconsider its ship building provision in Portsmouth or Plymouth for example ( ie, these yards will be upgraded and upskilled instead of Scottish yards)
HMG will be better prepared next time, thats for sure. Either way, the Nats have done their damage, and Scotland will suffer regardless of the outcome of this vote. Who's going to be making REALLY long term investments in Scotland now? Lets face it, in 20 years Scotland won't even have the oil for the NAts to pretend will pay the bills.
The only hope of this not happening will be if its a 70/30 no vote or better this time. And I cannot see that happening. Scotland's future, which could have and should have been brilliant and secure as an integral, valued member of the UK is now irrevocably blighted.
I think this is good post.I would also predict that the British Government will be thinking along similar lines, and that being the case, you can expect it to be planning for that vote by progressively pulling stuff back south of the border. Public sector jobs will progressivlely be moved south. Expect BAE to reconsider its ship building provision in Portsmouth or Plymouth for example ( ie, these yards will be upgraded and upskilled instead of Scottish yards)
HMG will be better prepared next time, thats for sure. Either way, the Nats have done their damage, and Scotland will suffer regardless of the outcome of this vote. Who's going to be making REALLY long term investments in Scotland now? Lets face it, in 20 years Scotland won't even have the oil for the NAts to pretend will pay the bills.
The only hope of this not happening will be if its a 70/30 no vote or better this time. And I cannot see that happening. Scotland's future, which could have and should have been brilliant and secure as an integral, valued member of the UK is now irrevocably blighted.
The SNP and its supporters really are doing irreparable damage to Scotland.
The vote will be closer than was anticipated when it was agreed that Scotland could have the vote.
The rUK will be quite rightly be more cautious and measured in future. There is also the risk that if the Scots continue to be so belligerent and unaware of the massive support the rUk has given them, then bad feelings are going to creep in.
Moving money to reinvest in Portsmouth for the Royal Navy, for example, would be a VERY popular move down here. A vote winner.
toppstuff said:
andymadmak said:
It will be interesting to see what happens after the NO vote. I am predicting that it WILL be a no, but by a narrower margin than is desirable. - probably 60/40. If I am right about that, then i would fully expect 20 years of whining and victim badge waving by the SNP and its supporters leading to another vote in the mid 2030s. I think that one could well be a yes vote.
I would also predict that the British Government will be thinking along similar lines, and that being the case, you can expect it to be planning for that vote by progressively pulling stuff back south of the border. Public sector jobs will progressivlely be moved south. Expect BAE to reconsider its ship building provision in Portsmouth or Plymouth for example ( ie, these yards will be upgraded and upskilled instead of Scottish yards)
HMG will be better prepared next time, thats for sure. Either way, the Nats have done their damage, and Scotland will suffer regardless of the outcome of this vote. Who's going to be making REALLY long term investments in Scotland now? Lets face it, in 20 years Scotland won't even have the oil for the NAts to pretend will pay the bills.
The only hope of this not happening will be if its a 70/30 no vote or better this time. And I cannot see that happening. Scotland's future, which could have and should have been brilliant and secure as an integral, valued member of the UK is now irrevocably blighted.
I think this is good post.I would also predict that the British Government will be thinking along similar lines, and that being the case, you can expect it to be planning for that vote by progressively pulling stuff back south of the border. Public sector jobs will progressivlely be moved south. Expect BAE to reconsider its ship building provision in Portsmouth or Plymouth for example ( ie, these yards will be upgraded and upskilled instead of Scottish yards)
HMG will be better prepared next time, thats for sure. Either way, the Nats have done their damage, and Scotland will suffer regardless of the outcome of this vote. Who's going to be making REALLY long term investments in Scotland now? Lets face it, in 20 years Scotland won't even have the oil for the NAts to pretend will pay the bills.
The only hope of this not happening will be if its a 70/30 no vote or better this time. And I cannot see that happening. Scotland's future, which could have and should have been brilliant and secure as an integral, valued member of the UK is now irrevocably blighted.
The SNP and its supporters really are doing irreparable damage to Scotland.
The vote will be closer than was anticipated when it was agreed that Scotland could have the vote.
The rUK will be quite rightly be more cautious and measured in future. There is also the risk that if the Scots continue to be so belligerent and unaware of the massive support the rUk has given them, then bad feelings are going to creep in.
Moving money to reinvest in Portsmouth for the Royal Navy, for example, would be a VERY popular move down here. A vote winner.
In that case they can whinge all they like. Without majority support, or being a party in control, there can't be another referendum anytime soon... can there? An opposition party can't bring on a vote, right?
ETA - Also I should add, I don't think another vote in 15 years time would be a totally awful thing. That is IF those proposing it learn from this referendum where the SNP have failed. A wiser nationlist party of some sort that has a concise, costed plan within the bounds of reality that drops the Tory-oppression line may get my vote in 2035 if what they say sounds fair and makes sense. But also - I don't want to live in a country that only has left wing parties thanks to dismal voter turn out and legacy-voting. Scotland would need to change its ways a bit before I would trust it to be independent.
Edited by Wrathalanche on Friday 6th June 10:28
simoid said:
Edinburger said:
True and facetious in one post!
What was facetious?It's another cost/risk of leaving the UK. Just like building navy ships in a foreign country is unpopular, and favouring a Scotland in the EU is illegal, people get particularly annoyed by foreign call centres.
Technically, they would be "foreign" to rUK if we were indepependent, but most people class foreign call centres as those offshored in India, etc., with the resulting challenges they create.
Siscar said:
Edinburger said:
They have a dual primary listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and the London Stock Exchange, and HSBC was founded in London in 1991 by the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation to act as a new group holding company. The origins of the bank lie in Hong Kong and Shanghai, where branches were first opened in 1865.
Anyway, my point is that it's unfair to compare them with RBS et al for that reason.
This is silly, none of that makes them any less British or any less of a player in the UK. Like it or not they have a massive presence in the here. The big differences between HSBC and RBS are:Anyway, my point is that it's unfair to compare them with RBS et al for that reason.
1. They are much bigger
2. They haven't indulged in crazy deals like ABN Amro
3. They haven't come anywhere near to bankruptcy
4. They haven't had to be bailed out by the public purse
5. They aren't now majority owned by HMG.
If you are going to compare the two it is hard to think of a positive measure on which HSBC doesn't outrank RBS with ease.
Wrathalanche said:
toppstuff said:
andymadmak said:
It will be interesting to see what happens after the NO vote. I am predicting that it WILL be a no, but by a narrower margin than is desirable. - probably 60/40. If I am right about that, then i would fully expect 20 years of whining and victim badge waving by the SNP and its supporters leading to another vote in the mid 2030s. I think that one could well be a yes vote.
I would also predict that the British Government will be thinking along similar lines, and that being the case, you can expect it to be planning for that vote by progressively pulling stuff back south of the border. Public sector jobs will progressivlely be moved south. Expect BAE to reconsider its ship building provision in Portsmouth or Plymouth for example ( ie, these yards will be upgraded and upskilled instead of Scottish yards)
HMG will be better prepared next time, thats for sure. Either way, the Nats have done their damage, and Scotland will suffer regardless of the outcome of this vote. Who's going to be making REALLY long term investments in Scotland now? Lets face it, in 20 years Scotland won't even have the oil for the NAts to pretend will pay the bills.
The only hope of this not happening will be if its a 70/30 no vote or better this time. And I cannot see that happening. Scotland's future, which could have and should have been brilliant and secure as an integral, valued member of the UK is now irrevocably blighted.
I think this is good post.I would also predict that the British Government will be thinking along similar lines, and that being the case, you can expect it to be planning for that vote by progressively pulling stuff back south of the border. Public sector jobs will progressivlely be moved south. Expect BAE to reconsider its ship building provision in Portsmouth or Plymouth for example ( ie, these yards will be upgraded and upskilled instead of Scottish yards)
HMG will be better prepared next time, thats for sure. Either way, the Nats have done their damage, and Scotland will suffer regardless of the outcome of this vote. Who's going to be making REALLY long term investments in Scotland now? Lets face it, in 20 years Scotland won't even have the oil for the NAts to pretend will pay the bills.
The only hope of this not happening will be if its a 70/30 no vote or better this time. And I cannot see that happening. Scotland's future, which could have and should have been brilliant and secure as an integral, valued member of the UK is now irrevocably blighted.
The SNP and its supporters really are doing irreparable damage to Scotland.
The vote will be closer than was anticipated when it was agreed that Scotland could have the vote.
The rUK will be quite rightly be more cautious and measured in future. There is also the risk that if the Scots continue to be so belligerent and unaware of the massive support the rUk has given them, then bad feelings are going to creep in.
Moving money to reinvest in Portsmouth for the Royal Navy, for example, would be a VERY popular move down here. A vote winner.
In that case they can whinge all they like. Without majority support, or being a party in control, there can't be another referendum anytime soon... can there? An opposition party can't bring on a vote, right?
ETA - Also I should add, I don't think another vote in 15 years time would be a totally awful thing. That is IF those proposing it learn from this referendum where the SNP have failed. A wiser nationlist party of some sort that has a concise, costed plan within the bounds of reality that drops the Tory-oppression line may get my vote in 2035 if what they say sounds fair and makes sense. But also - I don't want to live in a country that only has left wing parties thanks to dismal voter turn out and legacy-voting. Scotland would need to change its ways a bit before I would trust it to be independent.
Edited by Wrathalanche on Friday 6th June 10:28
Don't agree about "progressively pulling stuff back south of the border" though. That's needless and most if wou;dn't be going "back" even if it were moved to England, Wales or Northern Ireland. Public sector jobs will definitely not be moved south.
andymadmak said:
DanL said:
In fairness, what annoys people about foreign call centres is a combination of not being able to understand the accent,
Scotland is going to suffer then! 
Scotland is a very popular place for call centres for many reasons including the friendlieness of its people and the ease of understanding the softer central belt accents
Edinburger said:
andymadmak said:
DanL said:
In fairness, what annoys people about foreign call centres is a combination of not being able to understand the accent,
Scotland is going to suffer then! Scotland is a very popular place for call centres for many reasons including the friendlieness of its people and the ease of understanding the softer central belt accents
Edinburger said:
simoid said:
Edinburger said:
True and facetious in one post!
What was facetious?It's another cost/risk of leaving the UK. Just like building navy ships in a foreign country is unpopular, and favouring a Scotland in the EU is illegal, people get particularly annoyed by foreign call centres.
Technically, they would be "foreign" to rUK if we were indepependent, but most people class foreign call centres as those offshored in India, etc., with the resulting challenges they create.
Foreign is foreign, whether you think it's me being facetious or not.
Edited by simoid on Friday 6th June 10:47
simoid said:
Edinburger said:
simoid said:
Edinburger said:
True and facetious in one post!
What was facetious?It's another cost/risk of leaving the UK. Just like building navy ships in a foreign country is unpopular, and favouring a Scotland in the EU is illegal, people get particularly annoyed by foreign call centres.
Technically, they would be "foreign" to rUK if we were indepependent, but most people class foreign call centres as those offshored in India, etc., with the resulting challenges they create.
Foreign is foreign, whether you think it's me being facetious or not.
toppstuff said:
Edinburger said:
Public sector jobs will definitely not be moved south.
Why? How on earth do you come to that conclusion? Edinburger said:
Thenn ask ten people on the street whether they'd find a conversation with a Scottish call centre easier and more productive than with an Indian call centre.
Or if they'd prefer to speak to someone from their own country, which is the central point.I'd hazard a guess and say 10 'rUK' people would understand a call centre Indian almost as much as a call centre Scot.
Edinburger said:
Because on the basis of a No vote, there is no way that the UK Gov will find the millions and millions of pounds to move those jobs south "just in case" there's another referendum in the future.
I'm sure a Tory government with no prospect of much popularity in Scotland, but marginal seats down south, could manage.simoid said:
Edinburger said:
Thenn ask ten people on the street whether they'd find a conversation with a Scottish call centre easier and more productive than with an Indian call centre.
Or if they'd prefer to speak to someone from their own country, which is the central point.I'd hazard a guess and say 10 'rUK' people would understand a call centre Indian almost as much as a call centre Scot.
Then why are so many companies bringing offshore call centres back to this country because they failed in India, and often setting them up in err... Scotland?
Offshoring works for many jobs but not call centres.
simoid said:
Edinburger said:
Because on the basis of a No vote, there is no way that the UK Gov will find the millions and millions of pounds to move those jobs south "just in case" there's another referendum in the future.
I'm sure a Tory government with no prospect of much popularity in Scotland, but marginal seats down south, could manage.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff