Who is bogging off after the YES vote?

[GoneAnon]

I know that but to listen to some on here we are pinning all our hopes on that and they KNOW it is finished. But then again,I've been hearing that for most of my life now.

How on earth so many other countries get by is quite beyond me (and probably them too if they applied the same standard as our nae-saying friends).

[fluffnik]

Dryce said:

The ship has sailed. The milk has been spilled.

Yup.

That's no argument for keeping the same cleptocratic institutions that fked us over previously.

The UK is not our friend, never has been. We must not miss this opportunity to end it.

[MarkR26]

fluffnik said:

Yup.

That's no argument for keeping the same cleptocratic institutions that fked us over previously.

The UK is not our friend, never has been. We must not miss this opportunity to end it.

Indeed.

[Dryce]

GoneAnon said:

And, leaving all of that aside, should we only go independent "to get rich", or should we do it because we aspire to something better than what we have now?

I think there are good qualitative reasons for a potential 'yes'.

However economics and the pound (or whatever) in your pocket are much more tangible and simple to aspire too.

To be fair I think the 'to get rich' isn't what's driving this. It's actually more about the risk of the outcome being to 'to get poor'. The way the economic argument is being presented by the proponents of independence is about viability and some improved prosperity - not the sort of promise of wealth that would have dominated a campaign say in the 70s. And that has been backed by some fuzzy less tangible stuff about the future as a place to live and social aspirations.

[Dryce]

fluffnik said:

That's no argument for keeping the same cleptocratic institutions that fked us over previously.

The UK is not our friend, never has been. We must not miss this opportunity to end it.

And I'm quite sure that the some Shetlanders might substitute Scotland for UK in that statement.

[hidetheelephants]

jamieduff1981 said:

In Tiffany's case, the HSE gave them an improvement notice, and the operator just didn't get round to acting upon it.

I work in brownfield engineering for a service contractor. To be honest, it's all just a game of trying to find new justifications to defer maintenance. They physically can't liquidate enough manhours with the available bedding offshore to bring these assets up to scratch, and the production can't really support the cost of those manhours either. Nobody really wants to shut down though all the same - neither the operator themself nor the treasury. It's only really HSE that stands in their way, and it's not so much that they're not inspecting and handing out improvement notices, but more that nothing is getting done about it which kinda renders them a bit toothless until they stick their necks right out and slap a prohibition notice on the asset instead - but then the treasury gets upset too.

That's nothing new though; squeezing the assets has been the game since forever, but particularly the first slump in the 1980s. If it forces operators to give up on dangerous practices or clapped out platforms and move more assets subsea then better all round really, even if it does mean the UKCS becomes smaller.

[fluffnik]

Living in a country with no WMDs and travelling on a passport that I don't feel the need to excuse will be enough for me.

[fluffnik]

Dryce said:

fluffnik said:

That's no argument for keeping the same cleptocratic institutions that fked us over previously.

The UK is not our friend, never has been. We must not miss this opportunity to end it.

And I'm quite sure that the some Shetlanders might substitute Scotland for UK in that statement.

It seems not many, though I'd be right behind them if they sought independence.

I'm a supporter of autonomy in the general case, me.

[ViperPict]

This is PH and we have as many yes leaning folk as no on this thread (one I'd wager where a reasonable proportion can actually cast a vote on the issue) - times they are a changing! :-)

And I guess the premise of the thread is assuming the referendum will return a yes result!

[OlberJ]

fluffnik said:

Living in a country with no WMDs and travelling on a passport that I don't feel the need to excuse will be enough for me.

That's summed it up quite nicely.

Paul though, I hate you for mentioning this thread to me.

[jamieduff1981]

Dryce said:

To be fair I think the 'to get rich' isn't what's driving this. It's actually more about the risk of the outcome being to 'to get poor'.

This sums it up rather succinctly for me. I'm proud of my British nationality but actually don't hold national identity very high on my list of things which actually matter. If other people like to latch on to that sort of thing then fine, but I don't want to be "part of something" and I'm not "coming together" with anyone else for any cause. I just don't care. I can busy my mind with things which affect me much more directly than some meaningless word on the front cover of a passport.

I am very averse to the substantial risk (given that none of the numbers offered by the Yes campaign work - even those mentioned earlier relating to Scotland's share of international land for embassies - how far does anyone really think our £150MM will go in setting ourselves up abroad - or are we assuming the rUK will comply with our demands to share theirs like so many other bold and favourable assumptions) of getting poor under an independant government.

It seems to me that a substantial portion of Yes voters are those who perceive the UK to be a bad place to live in absolute terms, and feel they have nothing to lose and thus things can only get better.

By contrast, the UK is a great place to live in absolute terms. Of course there are things which annoy everyone. No country is proud and content with their administration. Before staking everything everyone has in the blind faith in a better life, I'd be grateful if some Yes voters took a look downwards to see how much of the world really is below them.

[Hollowpockets]

Instead of mud slinging and boarder control chat, Here's a basic everyday problem to think about... And there will be hundreds more to consider.

So who wants a landfill site next to there house or on their favourite spot to walk the dog? hundreds of thousands of tonnes of waste from the oil Industry is currently sent to landfill sites in England, in particular from our Oil Industry.
Scotland also sends tens of thousands of tonnes of radioactive waste and hazardous waste to English special rsa landfill sites. These facilities cost millions to build and run and scotland doesn't currently have it's own one, Who is going to pay for them? on top of everything else Salmond and his merry band haven't thought about.

As decommissioning increases, the volume of waste generated will increase by multiples of what it does now and it all needs to go somewhere...

It's just an example that I know of through my work but I'll bet 90% of people voting yes, aren't aware of or haven't considered these real problems that we will have to pay for and deal with.

Scotland is a great place already and I think there are too many opportunists that hope life will be easier without having to work any harder, being independent won't solve problems, it will create problems. Only the people finding fixes for these problems will do well, the rest will be worse off.

[ViperPict]

Hollowpockets said:

Instead of mud slinging and boarder control chat, Here's a basic everyday problem to think about... And there will be hundreds more to consider.

So who wants a landfill site next to there house or on their favourite spot to walk the dog? hundreds of thousands of tonnes of waste from the oil Industry is currently sent to landfill sites in England, in particular from our Oil Industry.
Scotland also sends tens of thousands of tonnes of radioactive waste and hazardous waste to English special rsa landfill sites. These facilities cost millions to build and run and scotland doesn't currently have it's own one, Who is going to pay for them? on top of everything else Salmond and his merry band haven't thought about.

As decommissioning increases, the volume of waste generated will increase by multiples of what it does now and it all needs to go somewhere...

It's just an example that I know of through my work but I'll bet 90% of people voting yes, aren't aware of or haven't considered these real problems that we will have to pay for and deal with.

Scotland is a great place already and I think there are too many opportunists that hope life will be easier without having to work any harder, being independent won't solve problems, it will create problems. Only the people finding fixes for these problems will do well, the rest will be worse off.

A lot of money in landfills and associated industry...

[jamieduff1981]

ViperPict said:

Hollowpockets said:

Instead of mud slinging and boarder control chat, Here's a basic everyday problem to think about... And there will be hundreds more to consider.

So who wants a landfill site next to there house or on their favourite spot to walk the dog? hundreds of thousands of tonnes of waste from the oil Industry is currently sent to landfill sites in England, in particular from our Oil Industry.
Scotland also sends tens of thousands of tonnes of radioactive waste and hazardous waste to English special rsa landfill sites. These facilities cost millions to build and run and scotland doesn't currently have it's own one, Who is going to pay for them? on top of everything else Salmond and his merry band haven't thought about.

As decommissioning increases, the volume of waste generated will increase by multiples of what it does now and it all needs to go somewhere...

It's just an example that I know of through my work but I'll bet 90% of people voting yes, aren't aware of or haven't considered these real problems that we will have to pay for and deal with.

Scotland is a great place already and I think there are too many opportunists that hope life will be easier without having to work any harder, being independent won't solve problems, it will create problems. Only the people finding fixes for these problems will do well, the rest will be worse off.

A lot of money in landfills and associated industry...

For the people that own them. For everyone else it's just a lot of public money buried.

[hidetheelephants]

Hollowpockets said:

Instead of mud slinging and boarder control chat, Here's a basic everyday problem to think about... And there will be hundreds more to consider.

So who wants a landfill site next to there house or on their favourite spot to walk the dog? hundreds of thousands of tonnes of waste from the oil Industry is currently sent to landfill sites in England, in particular from our Oil Industry.
Scotland also sends tens of thousands of tonnes of radioactive waste and hazardous waste to English special rsa landfill sites. These facilities cost millions to build and run and scotland doesn't currently have it's own one, Who is going to pay for them? on top of everything else Salmond and his merry band haven't thought about.

As decommissioning increases, the volume of waste generated will increase by multiples of what it does now and it all needs to go somewhere...

It's just an example that I know of through my work but I'll bet 90% of people voting yes, aren't aware of or haven't considered these real problems that we will have to pay for and deal with.

Scotland is a great place already and I think there are too many opportunists that hope life will be easier without having to work any harder, being independent won't solve problems, it will create problems. Only the people finding fixes for these problems will do well, the rest will be worse off.

None of these are any immediate concern of the government; whatever commercial arrangements EDF have with BNFL will likely continue. If not, planning for onsite storage of spent fuel is already inhand because of Cumbria CC deciding that temporary waste storage facilities are much safer than permanent ones. Where there's muck there's brass, as they like to say in Yorkshire; waste disposal solutions will be found by the companies that create it, just like what happens now. Or are you one of those socialists who think government should run everything?

[Hollowpockets]

Not really, It would create a couple of jobs but that'll be it. All the UK's current landfills are owned by Spanish/French/European owned companies. So they reap the benefits and extract all profits and our country has to give up valuable land to deal with it, That IS how it happens now.

[ViperPict]

jamieduff1981 said:

ViperPict said:

Hollowpockets said:

Instead of mud slinging and boarder control chat, Here's a basic everyday problem to think about... And there will be hundreds more to consider.

So who wants a landfill site next to there house or on their favourite spot to walk the dog? hundreds of thousands of tonnes of waste from the oil Industry is currently sent to landfill sites in England, in particular from our Oil Industry.
Scotland also sends tens of thousands of tonnes of radioactive waste and hazardous waste to English special rsa landfill sites. These facilities cost millions to build and run and scotland doesn't currently have it's own one, Who is going to pay for them? on top of everything else Salmond and his merry band haven't thought about.

As decommissioning increases, the volume of waste generated will increase by multiples of what it does now and it all needs to go somewhere...

It's just an example that I know of through my work but I'll bet 90% of people voting yes, aren't aware of or haven't considered these real problems that we will have to pay for and deal with.

Scotland is a great place already and I think there are too many opportunists that hope life will be easier without having to work any harder, being independent won't solve problems, it will create problems. Only the people finding fixes for these problems will do well, the rest will be worse off.

A lot of money in landfills and associated industry...

For the people that own them. For everyone else it's just a lot of public money buried.

There is benefit to the economy.

[Hollowpockets]

hidetheelephants said:

None of these are any immediate concern of the government; whatever commercial arrangements EDF have with BNFL will likely continue. If not, planning for onsite storage of spent fuel is already inhand because of Cumbria CC deciding that temporary waste storage facilities are much safer than permanent ones. Where there's muck there's brass, as they like to say in Yorkshire; waste disposal solutions will be found by the companies that create it, just like what happens now. Or are you one of those socialists who think government should run everything?

Sorry, I'm not talking about power generation plant waste as I know nothing about it, just the oil industry generated stuff. No I don't think the government should run everything. I'm just trying to highlight a problem that will affect the general public, vote yes, you could have a radioactive landfill site on your doorstep.

However, if the government did own such profitable businesses, maybe the UK wouldn't be in the mess it is today.

Edited by Hollowpockets on Monday 14th April 08:14

[Hugo a Gogo]

citizensm1th said:

Driver101 said:

You don't need a passport or visa for Ireland.

As for the EU, there is two arguments to that too.

but that a huge assumption your making there that the uk would agree to the same arrangement let alone the fact that Ireland is part of the EU and Scotland would not be, given that I believe EU member states are bound by treaty to have secure borders with non EU states.

so I ask where has anyone in the uk government stated that citizens of an independent Scotland would have free and unhindered access to the uk?

the reason UK and Ireland aren't in the Schengen agreement, is because they have open borders with Jersey Guernsey and Isle of Man, which are not in the EU (or the UK for that matter)

[Leithen]

Strange that there should be any unhappiness over Scots emigrating after the unlikely event of a yes vote. We've been settling all over the world for generations before this latest filial spat.

Much to do with the st weather I suspect. Have the SNP blamed that on the Union yet?