Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5

[simoid]

Calvib said:

I don't know what you get so het up about anyway.

We'll vote YES.

Our respective governements bill bash out a deal that works better for both countries than the current set up.

This will involve a temporary currency union.

Scottish continued use of embassies.

A shared energy grid.

Very easy trading conditions.

Continued use of Union Flag.

We'll get on just fine and wonder what all the fuss was about.

What you've done there is described the current system - well done. You're coming on side and you don't even know it!

[simoid]

Yes voters:

You can't have a proper debate without them, and you can't have a proper debate with them...

[NoNeed]

Calvib said:

I don't know what you get so het up about anyway.

We'll vote YES.

Our respective governements bill bash out a deal that works better for both countries than the current set up.

This will involve a temporary currency union.

Scottish continued use of embassies.

A shared energy grid.

Very easy trading conditions.

Continued use of Union Flag.

We'll get on just fine and wonder what all the fuss was about.

So it's vote no to remain dependent


Or



Vote yes to remain dependent.




Goood we can scrap tgat voting no sense then.

[simoid]

"A temporary currency union"

A little knowledge of economics is a dangerous thing, eh,

[Calvib]

Neonblau said:

Neonblau said:

No chance of a sensible answer to my questions then?

That'll be a no then.

You really don't have a clue do you?

An economic pygmy like the rest of them. Just spouting the same old rubbish from Yes HQ without even a basic understanding of how anything works.

You and your arguments make the best case possible for a No vote, you really do.

Again, resorting to insults when your position is threatened - speaks volumes.

I'm not actually sure what you're on about as there have been a lot of posts and I don't catch them all (especially on my phone).

But note that the economic argument is just of many facets to the debate - you appear to think it is the only issue.

But related to economics, I think the £10BN+ saved by getting rid of Trident's replacement, the few £BN from HS2, hundreds £Ms on London sewer upgrade, hundreds of £M on repairing Westmonster's physical infrastructure (the moral infrastructure is beyond hope) etc etc will be quite beneficial. A9 and A96 duelled, numerous new schools and hospitals etc etc could be paid for.

But then there is just the potential for societal improvement. That will be the greatest benefit (and I firmly believe that will be for rUK too).

[ExV8]

Calvib said:

I don't know what you get so het up about anyway.

We'll vote YES.

Our respective governements bill bash out a deal that works better for both countries than the current set up.

This will involve a temporary currency union.

Scottish continued use of embassies.

A shared energy grid.
M
Very easy trading conditions.

Continued use of Union Flag.

We'll get on just fine and wonder what all the fuss was about.

That would work, until rUK says denied.

Do Yes voters really think rUK will be a walkover. It won't be amicable at all.

[Calvib]

simoid said:

Calvib said:

I don't know what you get so het up about anyway.

We'll vote YES.

Our respective governements bill bash out a deal that works better for both countries than the current set up.

This will involve a temporary currency union.

Scottish continued use of embassies.

A shared energy grid.

Very easy trading conditions.

Continued use of Union Flag.

We'll get on just fine and wonder what all the fuss was about.

What you've done there is described the current system - well done. You're coming on side and you don't even know it!

But I think that even you can understand that Scotland can change significantly while having these same characteristics.

[Calvib]

ExV8 said:

Calvib said:

I don't know what you get so het up about anyway.

We'll vote YES.

Our respective governements bill bash out a deal that works better for both countries than the current set up.

This will involve a temporary currency union.

Scottish continued use of embassies.

A shared energy grid.
M
Very easy trading conditions.

Continued use of Union Flag.

We'll get on just fine and wonder what all the fuss was about.

That would work, until rUK says denied.

Do Yes voters really think rUK will be a walkover. It won't be amicable at all.

But it will be vastly in the interest of rUK too. In the real world, decisions will not be made by toys-out-of-the-pram keyboard warriors on the basis out of spite and the ethos of 'I'm not playing with you'...

[Calvib]

Anyway, bed time.

More fun on this topic tomorrow.

[simoid]

Calvib said:

simoid said:

Calvib said:

I don't know what you get so het up about anyway.

We'll vote YES.

Our respective governements bill bash out a deal that works better for both countries than the current set up.

This will involve a temporary currency union.

Scottish continued use of embassies.

A shared energy grid.

Very easy trading conditions.

Continued use of Union Flag.

We'll get on just fine and wonder what all the fuss was about.

What you've done there is described the current system - well done. You're coming on side and you don't even know it!

But I think that even you can understand that Scotland can change significantly while having these same characteristics.

Yes we can. Improving all the time with devolution,

Leave the UK?

No.

Thanks

[simoid]

Calvib said:

Again, resorting to insults when your position is threatened - speaks volumes.

I'm not actually sure what you're on about as there have been a lot of posts and I don't catch them all (especially on my phone).

But note that the economic argument is just of many facets to the debate - you appear to think it is the only issue.

But related to economics, I think the £10BN+ saved by getting rid of Trident's replacement, the few £BN from HS2, hundreds £Ms on London sewer upgrade, hundreds of £M on repairing Westmonster's physical infrastructure (the moral infrastructure is beyond hope) etc etc will be quite beneficial. A9 and A96 duelled, numerous new schools and hospitals etc etc could be paid for.

But then there is just the potential for societal improvement. That will be the greatest benefit (and I firmly believe that will be for rUK too).

Trident will cost us billions to move,
HS2 is an investment for Scotland too.
We don't pay for London's sewers.
Public buildings need maintaining.
The Scottish government can dual the A9 and A96 any time they want, with devolution.

"Societal improvement"?

[voyds9]

Calvib said:

But it will be vastly in the interest of rUK too. In the real world, decisions will not be made by toys-out-of-the-pram keyboard warriors on the basis out of spite and the ethos of 'I'm not playing with you'...

In an election year they will be fighting for votes not trying to placate non-voters.

They will be trying to appear tough so we aren't walked over by another outside influence

[Calvib]

simoid said:

Trident will cost us billions to move,
HS2 is an investment for Scotland too.
We don't pay for London's sewers.
Public buildings need maintaining.
The Scottish government can dual the A9 and A96 any time they want, with devolution.

"Societal improvement"?

I was going to bed but I HAD to respond to this one!

This is the distilled nature of the utter subjective rhetoric on this thread. Spinning on the scale of pulsar star!

Each point, without exception, is utter spin.

PLEASE come to one of the televised referendum debates!

[Calvib]

simoid said:

Yes we can. Improving all the time with devolution,

Leave the UK?

No.

Thanks

Westmonster can remove our parliament whenever they decide to. And there are some figures who may have more power after the next general election who would like to see that come to pass (an opinion mirrored by many on this forum).

[Calvib]

voyds9 said:

Calvib said:

But it will be vastly in the interest of rUK too. In the real world, decisions will not be made by toys-out-of-the-pram keyboard warriors on the basis out of spite and the ethos of 'I'm not playing with you'...

In an election year they will be fighting for votes not trying to placate non-voters.

They will be trying to appear tough so we aren't walked over by another outside influence

So they'll be appealing to only Daily Mail readers then?

[ExV8]

Calvib said:

So they'll be appealing to only Daily Mail readers then?

Should the vote go yes (unlikely) then the negotiations will be in favour of rUK. Scotland would be a totally different country outside of the EU.

[Calvib]

ExV8 said:

Calvib said:

So they'll be appealing to only Daily Mail readers then?

Should the vote go yes (unlikely) then the negotiations will be in favour of rUK. Scotland would be a totally different country outside of the EU.

No, we'll be in the EU, at least until the day of independence.

[///ajd]

Calvib said:

///ajd said:

///ajd said:

It must be a wind up.

Calvib, can you explain why you think the rUK should enter into an "energy union" with Scotland (as per the farcical white paper), and send billions of subsidy to Scotland (at the expense of rUK) as it does at the moment in the UK (where we're all together so it doesn't matter)?

This is the only thing supporting Scottish renewables at the moment - and the subsidy would stop with a Yes, just as sure as the RN frigates would be built in rUK.

Calvib, can you debate these points?

Looking to the future, rUK cannot meet it's energy from renewables targets without.

Says who? The SNP?

Why on earth do you think the rUK would let Scotland keep all the oil AND give Scotland billion in subsidy. You can't possibly not see how absurd that would be.

[blinkythefish]

Calvib said:

Borghetto said:

I predict that now Calvib has received another good thrashing, he'll retire to lick his wounds. He will be replaced by one of the other nationalist idiots - they know who they are.

Afraid not. I think highlighting the clear bias on this thread has been fairly well achieved! The selection of information posted and combined with the omission of alternative views is quite appalling. And then when other information is provided there is the most subjective spin on it to attempt to bring it in line with the paradigm.

The premature triumphalism of some posting on here is really quite amusing. It is clear that the union is broken - there would not be 40-50% (at the very least) of Scots wanting out of the Union if it was working. It cannot be fixed. We will be off sooner or later. The only genuine reason that I retain for perhaps wanting a no vote is what we are leaving the rUK to - that saddens me and I worry for friends who live down south. If you don't live in London and the SE, you are shafted.

The unionist economic 'arguments' are filled with so much deliberate obfuscation that it just stinks of desperation - it is a stupid tactic if you think that it'll convince folk by trying to bewilder them them pseudo-technical information.

There are so many issues bandied about on here as fact when, at the very least, there is significant uncertainty (largely down to Westmonster refusing to discuss important issues - e.g. they could resolve the EU issue by asking the question directly to the EU but they chose not to - I wonder why?!). I've shown this thread to undecided voters to let them see how the average English person regards the independence issue - you will glad to know you've moved a few people to a YES vote now!

I will return on Sept 19th - to wish you all the best in your future without Scotland. (that's a Scottish love bomb right there).

The "bias" comes from the fact that independence, or at least the version being offered is such a bad idea that anyone with half a brain can point out the flaws. Go over to yes Scotland for some hardcore "well all be rich cos oil" to balance it out.

And, "how the average English person regards the independence issue". If you had paid any attention to his thread you might have twigged that a majority of people posting against independence are from Scotland.

[SBDJ]

Calvib said:

This will involve a temporary currency union

Actually it's been stated that if by some miracle a currency union was to be offered it could only ever be offered on a long term basis. A short term currency union is simply not viable.

Thankfully it's not on the table at all.

Calvib said:

Scottish continued use of embassies

At a cost of course. Yes, I know, you think Scotland is entitled to 10% of them - but if you are going to go down that route then please remember that of course this means Scotland would only also own 10% of it's own assets. You can't have 100% of yours + 10% of the rUKs after all.

Calvib said:

No, we'll be in the EU, at least until the day of independence.

Thats an obvious statement - assuming the UK doesn't depart the EU in the interim then you would still be part of the UK and thus in the EU. That same EU who have confirmed - in writing to the Scottish government, twice - that you would be a new country applying to be in the EU. Even if your application was fast tracked it's still a long and involved process and something I don't imagine would be accomplished before independence day.