Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5

[pcvdriver]

barryrs said:

Being an Englishman I had avoided that topic as it appers I'm not welcome in a Scottish forum.

Hmm where have I heard that before.

What's being English got to do with the price of cheese in Belgium on a Tuesday afternoon? Or being welcome on a Scottish Forum? ........Er, absolutely bugger all, unless you're just a st-stirring troll, which going by your posts, you're actually interested in debating the topic. So again I'll ask - why would you appear to be unwelcome for just being English? - I'm English too.....

[anonymous-user]

scorp said:

OpulentBob said:

Watched Braveheart last night, and thought of this thread. The English really were sts.

Whats that got to do with present day English people? Also the film has little to do with historical reality , so really, what has it got to do with anything?

PS: Couldn't tell if you're being sarcastic

Not sarcastic, just saying, it made me think of this thread. If people think that's accurate then I can see support for a Yes. I'd imagine Americans would be in full support.

[simoid]

pcvdriver said:

What's being English got to do with the price of cheese in Belgium on a Tuesday afternoon? Or being welcome on a Scottish Forum? ........Er, absolutely bugger all, unless you're just a st-stirring troll, which going by your posts, you're actually interested in debating the topic. So again I'll ask - why would you appear to be unwelcome for just being English? - I'm English too.....

What is it you want to achieve by leaving the UK and joining a currency union, again?

[pcvdriver]

simoid said:

If UKIP are so irrelevant, why do you keep posting about them?

I'm only responding to another poster's point of view - I was seeking clarity in a response from him, namely; if it was UKIP he was referring to. I'd say that without retaining a single deposit so far, that UKIP are indeed a total irrelevance North of the border.

Edited by pcvdriver on Thursday 24th April 08:51

[toppstuff]

Interesting to see how the Nats have returned now that the thread has drifted away from talking about the iceberg ( currency, EU, debt, jobs) and has started talking about the colour of the curtains and what the Nats will wear if there is a big party celebration in the event of a Yes vote..

[simoid]

pcvdriver said:

I'm only responding to another poster's point of view - I was seeking clarity in a response from him, namely; if it was UKIP he was referring to. I'd say that without retaining a single deposit so far, that UKIP are indeed a total irrelevance North of the border. [laugh]

Not sure why you're laughing

Indeed, Scotland swings to the left, as it were. That's exactly Wiggly's point, the chances of a centre/right government are vanishingly small.

[Gargamel]

The questuion now appears to be what can the better together campaign do or say that can help lift them in the polls.

Is there a genuine possibility of Scotland voting for this madness. The BTC have correctly in my view pointed out the holes in the YES campaign, however their credibility is such that they aren't being believed.

Should they now start providing an alternative vision, where they offer more devolved power.

[barryrs]

pcvdriver said:

What's being English got to do with the price of cheese in Belgium on a Tuesday afternoon? Or being welcome on a Scottish Forum? ........Er, absolutely bugger all, unless you're just a st-stirring troll, which going by your posts, you're actually interested in debating the topic. So again I'll ask - why would you appear to be unwelcome for just being English? - I'm English too.....

Having read a fair bit of that topic (but not all) it appears that if you didnt reside in Scotland some of the Nats felt it was interference of non residents to have an opinion.

This attitude follows the SNP line clearly as unless you live in Scotland it appears its none of your concern.

[pcvdriver]

barryrs said:

Having read a fair bit of that topic (but not all) it appears that if you didnt reside in Scotland some of the Nats felt it was interference of non residents to have an opinion.

This attitude follows the SNP line clearly as unless you live in Scotland it appears its none of your concern.

It's only interference if you're not actually interested in debate and just wanting to join in st-stirring, of which there's been quite a bit to be fair. Quite Frankly, all these responses of "Freedom" from mindless tts does begin to get a bit old.

[steveatesh]

toppstuff said:

Interesting to see how the Nats have returned now that the thread has drifted away from talking about the iceberg ( currency, EU, debt, jobs) and has started talking about the colour of the curtains and what the Nats will wear if there is a big party celebration in the event of a Yes vote..

I imagine that's because they are unable to answer those issues due to the fact Nats have their head in the sand about them.

As I see this debate up to now:

They want more self determination but also want to rejoin the EU. However they ignore the fact that this will result in them having less self determination than they now have due to the requirements that will be imposed upon them to join. Or they can have full self determination and chose to remain outside of the EU, but then suffer trade problems.

They want to maintain a socialist utopia but ignore the fact that a stable currency is a requirement because capitalism has to pay for socialist ideology.

They can't have a stable currency under their proposal to use the Pound without a currency union in place

They don't want nuclear weapons but want to remain a full part of NATO

They don't want the nuclear base but expect to still be building ships for the rUK

They will lose significant amount of jobs and wealth when the finance sector moves south as it must to survive without a currency union

The thing they base their future wealth on, oil, is diminishing in the North Sea and in any case will become less economical to pump due to the development of shale oil in the USA which will and is affecting global supply of oil and with it the price.

And presumably much more

I'm trying to understand the reasons behind this desire to be a separate nation from rUK because the logical ones don't stack up and no Nat has put forward a case that stands logical scrutiny. So help me out Nats, what is your intended outcome here.

I've read PCV on here a few posts ago say he just wants things to be better, but without defining what better means.

Does it simply mean not having Westminster have a say in Scottish legislation, despite having full representation there?

If that's not it please will you explain specifically
what is going to be better?
What will people actually see different as they go about their day to day lives?
Specifically How will they experience life differently from birth to death to how they experience it now?
What does better mean Ito you?

Edited by steveatesh on Thursday 24th April 09:31

[steveatesh]

Gargamel said:

The questuion now appears to be what can the better together campaign do or say that can help lift them in the polls.

Is there a genuine possibility of Scotland voting for this madness. The BTC have correctly in my view pointed out the holes in the YES campaign, however their credibility is such that they aren't being believed.

Should they now start providing an alternative vision, where they offer more devolved power.

The irony is that Scotland is already to get a lot more devolution under the Scotland Act, I believe 2016. They staus quo is not an option. They either vote for so called independence or to remain in the uk but with even more self determination than they have now, which is already more than any other region of the uk.

Vote Yes, the pathway to uncertainty and probable hard times
Vote No, the pathway to more devolution and self determination as already legislated for.

[barryrs]

pcvdriver said:

It's only interference if you're not actually interested in debate and just wanting to join in st-stirring, of which there's been quite a bit to be fair. Quite Frankly, all these responses of "Freedom" from mindless tts does begin to get a bit old.

But what else is a unionist left with?

Ask a unionist a question or make a statement and it will be researched and 9 times out of 10 a logical response will be posted (along with a pinch of sarcasm).

Ask a genuine question from a nat and 9 times out of 10 the silence is deafening. I dont know is a perfectly acceptable answer and would be respected but to ignore it and then pop up a week or so later with more drivel is also frustrating (I have a poster in mind and its not you).

[pcvdriver]

simoid said:

What is it you want to achieve by leaving the UK and joining a currency union, again?

Self-rule......instead of having to ask Westminster everytime we want to do something. Before you chirp on about Brussels. Any power Brussels has, has been ceded voluntarily by it's member states, this is not the case with Holyrood and Westminster.

[mcdjl]

pcvdriver said:

.....and by that I take it you mean a UKIP Utopian Scotland?.... But, for that to happen, first UKIP will need to pass the milestone of retaining one single deposit, just one, Then advancing from there. As yet, they have miserably failed to even get one deposit returned to them.....

wikipedia said:

In the 2010 UK general election UKIP Scotland's candidate Robert Smith saved his deposit in the seat of Orkney and Shetland, winning 6.3% of the vote. In 2013 UKIP candidates came fifth narrowly losing their deposit in the Aberdeen Donside by-election and also fifth in the Dunfermline by-election. However, at the start of 2014 in the Cowdenbeath by-election for the Scottish Parliament, UKIP came 4th, outpolling the Scottish Liberal Democrats for the first time.

[Blib]

How can you have self rule if you have no control over your currency?

[mcdjl]

pcvdriver said:

Self-rule......instead of having to ask Westminster everytime we want to do something. Before you chirp on about Brussels. Any power Brussels has, has been ceded voluntarily by it's member states, this is not the case with Holyrood and Westminster.

Actually it was, the Act of Union was the process of that volunteering.

[McWigglebum4th]

pcvdriver said:

McWigglebum4th said:

I'm not against independence

I'm against their vision of independence

i'm against the constant lies and bullst coming from the yeSNP


Give me a deeply right wing, liberal non bullst version of Scotland and i'd happily vote yes

.....and by that I take it you mean a UKIP Utopian Scotland?.... But, for that to happen, first UKIP will need to pass the milestone of retaining one single deposit, just one, Then advancing from there. As yet, they have miserably failed to even get one deposit returned to them.....

What the fk have UKIP got to do with anything?

They have zero MPs up here

So what the fk have they got to do with anything up here?

WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM WITH THEM?

Or are you deeply against the idea of a right wing liberal scotland



And drop your bullst about UKIP not retaining any deposits

It is 100% irrelevant



Why don't you move into new grounds for YES idiots and answer a question

[steveatesh]

pcvdriver said:

Self-rule......instead of having to ask Westminster everytime we want to do something. Before you chirp on about Brussels. Any power Brussels has, has been ceded voluntarily by it's member states, this is not the case with Holyrood and Westminster.

I'm curious as to what you mean by "self rule?
Does that mean over everything, so the EU can not have a say in any legislation or anything else, including trade agreements, borders, free movement of capital etc?

Or does it mean that the EU can have a say in the things they have a say in but under the even more intrusive rules and requirements that will be expected of Scotland, even if she is allowed to be a member and nobody vetoes application?

How much self rule is the right amount?

[pcvdriver]

mcdjl said:

pcvdriver said:

.....and by that I take it you mean a UKIP Utopian Scotland?.... But, for that to happen, first UKIP will need to pass the milestone of retaining one single deposit, just one, Then advancing from there. As yet, they have miserably failed to even get one deposit returned to them.....

wikipedia said:

In the 2010 UK general election UKIP Scotland's candidate Robert Smith saved his deposit in the seat of Orkney and Shetland, winning 6.3% of the vote. In 2013 UKIP candidates came fifth narrowly losing their deposit in the Aberdeen Donside by-election and also fifth in the Dunfermline by-election. However, at the start of 2014 in the Cowdenbeath by-election for the Scottish Parliament, UKIP came 4th, outpolling the Scottish Liberal Democrats for the first time.

The plain facts are that Ukip attracted less than 1% of the vote in the 2010 Holyrood elections and no Ukip candidate has ever retained his deposit in a Scottish election.

Link: http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/herald-view/... and if their statement is erroneous, then why haven't UKIP sued for libel? I'd suggest that wiki may be wrong in this instance.

[pcvdriver]

McWigglebum4th said:

What the fk have UKIP got to do with anything?

They have zero MPs up here

So what the fk have they got to do with anything up here?

WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM WITH THEM?

Or are you deeply against the idea of a right wing liberal scotland



And drop your bullst about UKIP not retaining any deposits

It is 100% irrelevant

Why don't you move into new grounds for YES idiots and answer a question

Ooooooh, aren't we touchy this morning? I was just wanting you to clarify if you meant UKIP, or not?...

Or did you have another right-wing liberal party in mind? If so, please tell us which one....