Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5

[///ajd]

A.J.M said:

Gaspode said:

A.J.M said:

Gaspode said:

Oh and BTW, did anyone else hear that Professor guy on Radio 4 yesterday morning point out that under international law Scotland would only be entitled to keep 8% of the oil revenue? Good luck with the Nats trying to 'negotiate' that percentage up

Nope, got any more info on that?

Would blow another rather large hole in the yessers claims..

Sure, here you are:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b609d594-97cc-11e3-ab60-...

That's behind the paywall.

Tip: type the headline of the ft article into google (which you can usually see the key headline words as the paywall kicks in), and add 'ft' into the search term. follow the google link and you'll get around the ft paywall. works for me.

Edited by ///ajd on Friday 25th April 20:40

[Gaspode]

A.J.M said:

That's behind the paywall.

That's strange, I'm not a subscriber but I got to it ok. The gist of it is that natural resource assets belong to the entire country that discovered them, it's not permissible for a part of a country to secede and take more than its share of those assets. Although it's international law, it's not yet been tested in court. But the guy is saying that there would be extremely strong pressure to uphold the principle, because if the Scots get away with it, it would set an extremely dangerous and destabilising precedent for the rest of the world.

[NoNeed]

exitwound said:

Yes I'm a Scot, but I detest all the stuff that goes with it, the nationalism, flagwaving, braveheart crap..

I just want us to be running our own show, with whatever resources we have. I want our votes to count for something up here.

The virulent reactions to my original post says only one thing, ..the UK is running scared that we leave, ..you don't want us, thats obvious, so why not encourage the Yes vote, ..got a problem with that?? If so what?

Yes I work in the NHS at a high profile post, but I retire soon and am willing to take the leap of faith.. As I said, their is no alternative except more and more misery foisted upon us by Westminster.

Oddly enough, there are more Yes votes among the non-Scot settlers up here than the actual Scots, ..explain that one!

Personally, I don't believe that us Scots have the balls to go for it, they want it, but are too scared to take the chance..

Cheers..

You miss the point spectacularly

Imagine your first child has become and adult and wants to leave home. The first question you ask is where are you going to live, what are you going to live on, are you moving into the right area maybe for work/college. You ask those sort of questions because you care.

If your child comes back and says " dad I have just landed a job £100k plus benefits and have already saved for a deposit on a place that is a 5 minute walk from where I will be workingand I'll have free weekends to see you and mom.

I suspect all is well and you wish them the best, shake hands and get on with life.


However, if you look at the YES campaign, it has been made on the hoof, written on the back of a fag packet before the interview.

Firstly it looks nothing like independence as although you son will have his own income he doesn't know how much. Then you probe for more details and find that he still wants to use your bank account as the one he said he would use when he left home was in a bank that went bust, ideally he would like his own but doesn't have a good enough credit rating for a good one.


The whole independence argument is deeply flawed, It can't even be called independence as you will rely on the UK for currency which will come with controls that you wont be allowed to break. You want to be in the EU which will make at least 80% of the rules you live under, and by all means dispute that figure but please tell me what area of you life is not currently ruled by the EU without saying defence, defence will come also, the idea come up every year.


If you look at what you want to keep you are effectively arguing for the union, you say you such things like you want to split and share assets yet at the same time want to keep all Scottish assets you yourself, you say you don't get the government you voted for and that is true of the Scottish parliament as 75% of scots didn't vote for the SNP and you say the Tories are ruining your society, if you thing the Tories are doing anything other than implement EU laws, directives and policies you are deluded, the royal mail is a good example of that, yet you are running to be controlled by them with open arms.

Not independence

Edited by NoNeed on Friday 25th April 22:26

[Gecko1978]

It's funny / odd how this debate gets closer to a racist rant as time goes on which plays nicely with the yes crowd as it allows them to avoid the important issues of (1 more time with feeling)

1. Currency

2. EU

3. Civil service jobs

4. Defence

5. Banking

6. Pensions

7. Postal nationalisation

8. Tax to pay for all if the above change

7. Visa relationship with other nations

[Troubleatmill]

Gecko1978 said:

7. Postal nationalisation

8. Tax to pay for all if the above change

7. Visa relationship with other nations

9??

Edited by Troubleatmill on Saturday 26th April 09:33

[McWigglebum4th]

Troubleatmill said:

Gecko1978 said:

It's funny / odd how this debate gets closer to a racist rant as time goes on which plays nicely with the yes crowd as it allows them to avoid the important issues of (1 more time with feeling)

1. Currency

2. EU

3. Civil service jobs

4. Defence

5. Banking

6. Pensions

7. Postal nationalisation

8. Tax to pay for all if the above change

7. Visa relationship with other nations

9??

Don't worry

Yes voters don't understand numbers

[NoNeed]

Gecko1978 said:

It's funny / odd how this debate gets closer to a racist rant as time goes on which plays nicely with the yes crowd as it allows them to avoid the important issues of (1 more time with feeling)

1. Currency

2. EU

3. Civil service jobs

4. Defence

5. Banking

6. Pensions

7. Postal nationalisation

8. Tax to pay for all if the above change

7. Visa relationship with other nations

the EU

Ship building

Nato


Childcare and the 40,000 missing women





I wonder if the NATS will show their faces the day we have to bail them out.

[Gecko1978]

Troubleatmill said:

Gecko1978 said:

7. Postal nationalisation

8. Tax to pay for all if the above change

7. Visa relationship with other nations

9??

Edited by Troubleatmill on Saturday 26th April 09:33

using phone hence could not edit lol still points 1 through 4 were enough

[Welshbeef]

Gecko1978 said:

It's funny / odd how this debate gets closer to a racist rant as time goes on which plays nicely with the yes crowd as it allows them to avoid the important issues of (1 more time with feeling)

1. Currency

2. EU

3. Civil service jobs

4. Defence

5. Banking

6. Pensions

7. Postal nationalisation

8. Tax to pay for all if the above change

7. Visa relationship with other nations

Why do yes supporters burger PVC VP clavib just vanish when there questions are raised and when they do return ignore it. Surely they must want these answers themselves.

[Edinburger]

Welshbeef said:

Why do yes supporters burger PVC VP clavib just vanish when there questions are raised and when they do return ignore it. Surely they must want these answers themselves.

I'd like answers to those points too.

I don't vanish - I'm here sporadically. Busy life, that's all.

[Troubleatmill]

Edinburger said:

I'd like answers to those points too.

So.. how could you vote for independence not having the answers?

You wouldn't buy a house without knowing what it costs to buy, how many bedrooms it has. what the condition it is in, and whether you can afford to run it.

Would you?

[McWigglebum4th]

Edinburger said:

I'd like answers to those points too.

But still you intend to vote YES without those answers

[Welshbeef]

Edinburger said:

I'd like answers to those points too.

I don't vanish - I'm here sporadically. Busy life, that's all.

I'd not buy a laptop/Xbox1/PS3/TV without knowing info about it, or a car I'd want key info the history the MOT the VED fee the ins costs then what are the ongoing running costs the servicing. No matter how much I wanted a car if I didn't have all that key info just buying it on a whim is risky

Now up it to a house purchase all info is required to buy it else you walk away - OR that the price is so low to counter all the risks.

Voting Yes with all the key info either unknown or disputed totally by those with a vested interest to get a yes vote is interesting.

[McWigglebum4th]

Oh the poverty the poverty did we mention the poverty

we are being oppressed

everyone in england is rich


oh the poverty

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-27163263

[Gecko1978]

McWigglebum4th said:

Oh the poverty the poverty did we mention the poverty

we are being oppressed

everyone in england is rich


oh the poverty

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-27163263

So lower rates of poverty are due to artificial low rents and the fact more folk live in social housing.

Question long term how will such policy be paid for ?

[Welshbeef]

Gecko1978 said:

So lower rates of poverty are due to artificial low rents and the fact more folk live in social housing.

Question long term how will such policy be paid for ?

Doesn't rUK pay Scotland more £ via the Barnett formulae currently hence free OAP care homes free prescriptions and as per the link on accommodation.

Bout time the Barnett formulae was revised to take into account the Darian bailout (NATS forget this and also the 270 years before oil was discovered they seem to think during the oil boom years rUK took more than they should but ignored all the centuries which rUK funded Scotland. )

[mcdjl]

A point which i think we've (i certainly have) overlooked in the past is that Alex et al have presented what they see as the bast plan for an indpendent Scotland. Very often this appears to be 'x is better together', but not always. When the other partner to their potential deal has publically said 'hmmm that doesn't sound so great to us' it shouldn't be surprising that Alex et al have to say scare mongering and bullying: to go to a plan B would be admitting that their going to have to accept something that won't be as good for Scotland. To do so now, before the negotiation have 'officially' started takes them from having a weak hand to....well showing all their cards really, which are basicaly, 'but you like us and we've got oil!'.
To admit to having a plan B thus means that hes selling Scotland out and giving someone else a better deal than he would like: although we all know this will happen even the most ferverent yes supporter (apart from fluff- sorry to pick on you again) would surely look at that and run away from independence? Mind you Alex has flipped betwen which currency he wants several time now so maybe hes not so bothered about that after all.

[Gecko1978]

mcdjl said:

A point which i think we've (i certainly have) overlooked in the past is that Alex et al have presented what they see as the bast plan for an indpendent Scotland. Very often this appears to be 'x is better together', but not always. When the other partner to their potential deal has publically said 'hmmm that doesn't sound so great to us' it shouldn't be surprising that Alex et al have to say scare mongering and bullying: to go to a plan B would be admitting that their going to have to accept something that won't be as good for Scotland. To do so now, before the negotiation have 'officially' started takes them from having a weak hand to....well showing all their cards really, which are basicaly, 'but you like us and we've got oil!'.
To admit to having a plan B thus means that hes selling Scotland out and giving someone else a better deal than he would like: although we all know this will happen even the most ferverent yes supporter (apart from fluff- sorry to pick on you again) would surely look at that and run away from independence? Mind you Alex has flipped betwen which currency he wants several time now so maybe hes not so bothered about that after all.

If you have a read of wings over Scotland they suggest not saying what plan b is because BT will.just attack it. Which of course they would and rightly so. As an economist I viewed the arguments on Wings as weak at best but mainly misguided and prejudice but hey they entitled to there view just a shame they have to lie and decive to get what they want.

An re raw deal as I have said before rUK will not give one inch in same way the wings lot are happy to say f rUK now.so will rUK respond in kind

[Troubleatmill]

Gecko1978 said:

mcdjl said:

A point which i think we've (i certainly have) overlooked in the past is that Alex et al have presented what they see as the bast plan for an indpendent Scotland. Very often this appears to be 'x is better together', but not always. When the other partner to their potential deal has publically said 'hmmm that doesn't sound so great to us' it shouldn't be surprising that Alex et al have to say scare mongering and bullying: to go to a plan B would be admitting that their going to have to accept something that won't be as good for Scotland. To do so now, before the negotiation have 'officially' started takes them from having a weak hand to....well showing all their cards really, which are basicaly, 'but you like us and we've got oil!'.
To admit to having a plan B thus means that hes selling Scotland out and giving someone else a better deal than he would like: although we all know this will happen even the most ferverent yes supporter (apart from fluff- sorry to pick on you again) would surely look at that and run away from independence? Mind you Alex has flipped betwen which currency he wants several time now so maybe hes not so bothered about that after all.

If you have a read of wings over Scotland they suggest not saying what plan b is because BT will.just attack it. Which of course they would and rightly so. As an economist I viewed the arguments on Wings as weak at best but mainly misguided and prejudice but hey they entitled to there view just a shame they have to lie and decive to get what they want.

An re raw deal as I have said before rUK will not give one inch in same way the wings lot are happy to say f rUK now.so will rUK respond in kind

So how can an intelligent person vote for yes - without it being a blind leap of faith?

[Welshbeef]

Troubleatmill said:

So how can an intelligent person vote for yes - without it being a blind leap of faith?

This is something they refuse to respond to unless we don't have any intelligent yes voters here.