Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5

[Borghetto]

Private registration plate? you must be one of those rich Jonnies - we won't have any truck with you in the new fairer SNP Scotland - you'll be tarred and feathered with the rest of your ilk.

[Rollin]

Gecko1978 said:

Wombat3 said:

The Nukes will stay as long as it takes to deal with them. Any face-painted fkwit who tries to interfere with them is likely to end up very dead. That is the reality. These are serious things, you do not fk about with them.

I suspect though can not prove this or offer any support to it that the storage facility and the sub base may remain part of the UK like say Diago Garcia air base or GITMO in cuba the US hold onto. So the SNP have a Nuke free scotland and the sub base is just a british overseas teritory which we pay a fee to Scotland for acess to each year.

Or we just say they are staying put we are not moving them and there is F all you can do about it....

Nationalists will tell you that that is a laughable idea as it's impossible to alter such rules. Similar to the way that the Scottish exclusive economic zone is impossible to alter through negotiation. They do this whilst insisting rules relating to EU membership, NATO membership are very flexible.

[Alpacaman]

I am sure there must be a plan B but it is probably so crap they are too terrified to tell people what it is, especially if plan A is anything to go by.

[McWigglebum4th]

http://www.yesdunfermline.com



cancelled due to lack of interest

[///ajd]

McWigglebum4th said:

http://www.yesdunfermline.com



cancelled due to lack of interest

they got near.....

In 11 days the final fundraiser will be over and considering we have raised £85 of the £11000 target, more than likely the event is going to be cancelled.

woeful.

[Borghetto]

I hope Fluff, Edinburgh and PCV get their ticket money back - they can always send the refund to the dodgy reverend in Bath.

[pcvdriver]

Neonblau said:

More deflection.

Are you going to respond to the questions as to why all these immigrants are going to come to Scotland, what jobs they will do in a shrinking economy (no CU and questionable EU membership) and what other decisions will be made by, in for Scotland and the associated benefits.

Currency Union has {b}NOT [/b] been formally ruled out, if you cast your mind back - it wasn't even an issue, until Gidiot unilaterally bumped his gums about it - so don't count your chickens on that one. Same goes for EU membership.....yet more (not even as yet negotiated) items for discussion.
I'm not expecting a tidal wave of immigrants the day after independence is announced - more a steady stream over 50 years, so that infrastructure (such as schools, nhs, etc. etc.) can be planned for.
As populations grow, the need for products and services increase, in turn leading to more jobs.

[Welshbeef]

That clip of Salmond made me LOL

"the White paper is the most in depth book in History".... rOFLOL

I take the white paper and raise you "elementary mathematics volume1" - actually the Beano or Dandy has more depth and credibility than anything SNP have said in its history

[McWigglebum4th]

McWigglebum4th said:

pcvdriver said:

Only if population density gets to be as out of control, through lack of proper planning as S E England.

It is a stated aim of the SNP to have unlimited immigration

It is also stated that to vote YES means we will end the bedroom tax and reverse all benefits cuts

It is also stated that scotland has zero growth due to tory policies


Meanwhile it is stated that a tory majority government in england will slash benefits and throw them out of their houses


So what is to stop everyone in england who is on benefits moving on mass into the workers paradise that is Scotland and going straight onto benefits?

Any chance of an answer to this one

[andymadmak]

pcvdriver said:

Currency Union has {b}NOT [/b] been formally ruled out, if you cast your mind back - it wasn't even an issue, until Gidiot unilaterally bumped his gums about it .

Um, do you not remember a recent announcement by the current Chancellor of the Exchequer and both of the people who stand any chance of replacing him in the next UK Government that specifically ruled out CU? I am struggling to see how you can ignore this.

As for the immigration....... How do you propose to control it, just in case, well, you know, the numbers got a bit tidal wavish, despite your best intents?

[pcvdriver]

iphonedyou said:

I keep seeing this mentioned (more people in at the start to pay for those at the end) and thought it sounded like a ponzi myself. Can PCVdriver please explain how this can continue in perpetuity?

It's quite simple really. Not all immigrants stay till old age, most immigrants are transient and only stay a few years before moving on elsewhere, or going back home (Just think of all the 20 to 30 somethings that travel the globe before returning home to start/resume a career). Inevitably some will stay and have children, and become part of the community.
If it was one way inbound immigrant traffic, then it would be a problem as you suggest, however, your assumptions that this is the case with all immigrants are erroneous.
At least we in Scotland are able to have sensible attitudes to immigration, without the need to get all xenophobic, perhaps even shouty and racist about it.

[AstonZagato]

Dur! By having immigration controls... No, wait...

[McWigglebum4th]

pcvdriver said:

It's quite simple really. Not all immigrants stay till old age, most immigrants are transient and only stay a few years before moving on elsewhere, or going back home (Just think of all the 20 to 30 somethings that travel the globe before returning home to start/resume a career). Inevitably some will stay and have children, and become part of the community.
If it was one way inbound immigrant traffic, then it would be a problem as you suggest, however, your assumptions that this is the case with all immigrants are erroneous.
At least we in Scotland are able to have sensible attitudes to immigration, without the need to get all xenophobic, perhaps even shouty and racist about it.

So by sensible you mean as much as possible and anyone who wants to come in

So what is to stop all of the taliban moving to scotland as you want no immigration checks of any kind

[Rollin]

pcvdriver said:

iphonedyou said:

I keep seeing this mentioned (more people in at the start to pay for those at the end) and thought it sounded like a ponzi myself. Can PCVdriver please explain how this can continue in perpetuity?

It's quite simple really. Not all immigrants stay till old age, most immigrants are transient and only stay a few years before moving on elsewhere, or going back home (Just think of all the 20 to 30 somethings that travel the globe before returning home to start/resume a career). Inevitably some will stay and have children, and become part of the community.
If it was one way inbound immigrant traffic, then it would be a problem as you suggest, however, your assumptions that this is the case with all immigrants are erroneous.
At least we in Scotland are able to have sensible attitudes to immigration, without the need to get all xenophobic, perhaps even shouty and racist about it.

By having UKIP policies whilst trying to be all 'leftie' and 'right on' about it.

[toppstuff]

andymadmak said:

Um, do you not remember a recent announcement by the current Chancellor of the Exchequer and both of the people who stand any chance of replacing him in the next UK Government that specifically ruled out CU? I am struggling to see how you can ignore this.

And the Governor of the Bank of England saying it would be effectively "very tricky". Which I think is code for " too bloody difficult unless you are mental". And he's not even English.

I think it is also fair to say that if the rUK population gets wind of the idea that the rUK carries the risks while the Scots carry only the upside, it will be politically toxic come the general election in 2015. English politicians will be lining up to be as inflexible as possible, simply because the rUK voters won't allow Scotland to walk away if it hurts the rest of the country. Telling the Scots to fk off will become a badge of pride among rUk MP's because they will want the vote.

Its devisive stuff. But the SNP started it..

[AstonZagato]

pcvdriver said:

It's quite simple really. Not all immigrants stay till old age, most immigrants are transient and only stay a few years before moving on elsewhere, or going back home (Just think of all the 20 to 30 somethings that travel the globe before returning home to start/resume a career). Inevitably some will stay and have children, and become part of the community.
If it was one way inbound immigrant traffic, then it would be a problem as you suggest, however, your assumptions that this is the case with all immigrants are erroneous.
At least we in Scotland are able to have sensible attitudes to immigration, without the need to get all xenophobic, perhaps even shouty and racist about it.

PMSL. That is the most ridiculous piece of claptrap that I have read on the subject for many a moon.

There is nothing racist or xenophobic about controlling immigration. It is entirely necessary to ensure that you have hospitals, schools, housing in place to cope with the influx.

[toppstuff]

pcvdriver said:

It's quite simple really. Not all immigrants stay till old age, most immigrants are transient and only stay a few years before moving on elsewhere, or going back home (Just think of all the 20 to 30 somethings that travel the globe before returning home to start/resume a career).

What are you blithering on about ?

You seem to have this notion that unfettered immigration, Scottish style, will consist of fresh-faced Scandinavians or photogenic Latvians hanging out in Scotland for a while and then moving back home after a Uni degree and a stint working at Costa Coffee. That is not what will happen.

What will happen is a bunch of economic migrants will move in, get work, drive cabs and do stuff in the black economy, and then bring their aunties, uncles, cousins and brothers over. A nice big extended family.
And they'll stay.

Great plan though. Any numbers or projections, perhaps some assumptions, to support your thesis?

[Neonblau]

pcvdriver said:

Currency Union has {b}NOT [/b] been formally ruled out, if you cast your mind back - it wasn't even an issue, until Gidiot unilaterally bumped his gums about it - so don't count your chickens on that one. Same goes for EU membership.....yet more (not even as yet negotiated) items for discussion.
I'm not expecting a tidal wave of immigrants the day after independence is announced - more a steady stream over 50 years, so that infrastructure (such as schools, nhs, etc. etc.) can be planned for.
As populations grow, the need for products and services increase, in turn leading to more jobs.

So, that can be summed up as

Currency Union - no idea
EU Membership - no idea
Immigration - no idea, when they're coming, where they're coming from or what they're going to do.

You say "as the population grows the need for products and services increase, in turn leading to more jobs." What is it you believe that will make the population start to increase? Immigration is almost exclusively economic - people leave countries where they have a poor standard of living to go to countries where they can find jobs and improve their standard of living. No jobs, and indeed no surplus of jobs then no immigrants. As other posters have pointed out you already have a pool of 500m potential immigrants in the EU. Why aren't they being encouraged to come?

If you are suggesting that we allow unrestricted immigration from outwith the EU you'll be guaranteed a wave of unskilled immigration. Or are you proposing to implement a points/skill based process which surprisingly enough already exists in the UK.

You completely miss the absolutely fundamental point that immigration is only advantageous when the demand for a workforce and or skills exceeds domestic supply. That is simple, classic and acknowledged economic theory, irrespective of your political hue.

You also miss the point that the economy is likely to shrink in an iScotland. For any demand for immigration to occur you will need the means of wealth generation - public sector jobs won't work in this context. What do you see as the means of generating wealth once your economy has shrunk, your benefits bill and borrowing costs increased and the ability to raise fresh capital impaired?

Actually I'm beginning to suspect you haven't got a fking clue what you're talking about.

Anyway, that's immigration, what about all the other decisions by, for in Scotland - remember you said earlier that immigration was "for starters".

Edited by Neonblau on Wednesday 16th April 19:29

[Rollin]

toppstuff said:

andymadmak said:

Um, do you not remember a recent announcement by the current Chancellor of the Exchequer and both of the people who stand any chance of replacing him in the next UK Government that specifically ruled out CU? I am struggling to see how you can ignore this.

And the Governor of the Bank of England saying it would be effectively "very tricky". Which I think is code for " too bloody difficult unless you are mental". And he's not even English.

I think it is also fair to say that if the rUK population gets wind of the idea that the rUK carries the risks while the Scots carry only the upside, it will be politically toxic come the general election in 2015. English politicians will be lining up to be as inflexible as possible, simply because the rUK voters won't allow Scotland to walk away if it hurts the rest of the country. Telling the Scots to fk off will become a badge of pride among rUk MP's because they will want the vote.

Its devisive stuff. But the SNP started it..

The UK population have already got wind of it and are dead against it.

Cameron should adopt Salmond's tactics with the following statement.

"How dare some impoverished tartan tosser come down here and tell the rUK what's best for them."

[jimmyjimjim]

andymadmak said:

pcvdriver said:

Currency Union has {b}NOT [/b] been formally ruled out, if you cast your mind back - it wasn't even an issue, until Gidiot unilaterally bumped his gums about it .

Um, do you not remember a recent announcement by the current Chancellor of the Exchequer and both of the people who stand any chance of replacing him in the next UK Government that specifically ruled out CU? I am struggling to see how you can ignore this.

pcvdriver is entirely correct on this.

Scotland has to vote yes, the negotiations have to have started, and Salmond has to formally, as part of the separation process, ask about currency union.

Then and only then can the rUK negotiators say, "No chance, as we've told you time and time again".

Until then, it's not formally ruled out. Despite it having been make clear that when the time comes it will not be an option.