Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 6
Discussion
Esseesse said:
whoami said:
lamboman100 said:
It is the women's vote that has given the "Yes" campaign the biggest lift in recent weeks (although, the trend is fading now).
A large number of women were undecided, until Darling screwed up the second presidential debate.
No, woman are leading the NO vote.A large number of women were undecided, until Darling screwed up the second presidential debate.
Everyone else is leading the "No" vote.
Women were / are leading the "undecided" vote.
It is women that will decide the result on Thursday.
And it looks almost certain to be a "No" vote that wins on Thursday.
Days of bad news (Obama wants no, Greenspan trashed Salmond's economic figures, the world's leading oil analyst firm trashed Salmond's oil figures, etc. etc.) have today been followed by a major bookie (Betfair) paying out early on the "No" camp winning on Thursday:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/re...
Wills2 said:
Wow that is interesting they must be confident, if the victory goes to the No vote by some margin that will make the pollsters look a little foolish.
To be fair I think it is a difficult result to predict for the polling companies. We don't have referendums very often in this country so there isn't a history that they can use to sanity check their results. Also, the campaign has seen some of the most overt intimidation in a UK election which may have resulted in people giving a false response to a pollster.The only time I can recall this happening in the past was during the 1992 General Election campaign when Labour were comfortably ahead in the polls (10% lead at one point) but finished 11% behind. The polling companies got it wrong and put it down to people being too intimidated to honestly answer their questions.
ralphrj said:
Wills2 said:
Wow that is interesting they must be confident, if the victory goes to the No vote by some margin that will make the pollsters look a little foolish.
To be fair I think it is a difficult result to predict for the polling companies. We don't have referendums very often in this country so there isn't a history that they can use to sanity check their results. Also, the campaign has seen some of the most overt intimidation in a UK election which may have resulted in people giving a false response to a pollster.The only time I can recall this happening in the past was during the 1992 General Election campaign when Labour were comfortably ahead in the polls (10% lead at one point) but finished 11% behind. The polling companies got it wrong and put it down to people being too intimidated to honestly answer their questions.
Oops. No EU for 5 years according to the Spanish
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
rovermorris999 said:
Oops. No EU for 5 years according to the Spanish
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
Bluff, bluster, scaremongering, badger, two weeks, two weeks TWO WEEKS!http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
bbc news ticker said:
Leaders of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) have appealed to voters in Scotland to reject independence.
The heads of the business lobbying group's regions and nations council network and the organisation's president Sir Mike Rake said staying in the union was the best way to grow the economy.
The CBI represents 190,000 businesses, which employ about seven million people.
A leaders' statement said: "We want Scotland to stay in the United Kingdom and hope you vote to do so. We believe that the prosperity of all people in the UK would be best-served by Scotland remaining part of it."
That's a sThe heads of the business lobbying group's regions and nations council network and the organisation's president Sir Mike Rake said staying in the union was the best way to grow the economy.
The CBI represents 190,000 businesses, which employ about seven million people.
A leaders' statement said: "We want Scotland to stay in the United Kingdom and hope you vote to do so. We believe that the prosperity of all people in the UK would be best-served by Scotland remaining part of it."
t load of businesses!MDMetal said:
ralphrj said:
Wills2 said:
Wow that is interesting they must be confident, if the victory goes to the No vote by some margin that will make the pollsters look a little foolish.
To be fair I think it is a difficult result to predict for the polling companies. We don't have referendums very often in this country so there isn't a history that they can use to sanity check their results. Also, the campaign has seen some of the most overt intimidation in a UK election which may have resulted in people giving a false response to a pollster.The only time I can recall this happening in the past was during the 1992 General Election campaign when Labour were comfortably ahead in the polls (10% lead at one point) but finished 11% behind. The polling companies got it wrong and put it down to people being too intimidated to honestly answer their questions.
So if intimidation forms a part of the poll results at what point does this intimidation take place?
That is not to say that it's not taking place as I believe it is but perhaps not at the point of the survey.
It will be interesting day on Friday of that there is no doubt.
Edited by Wills2 on Tuesday 16th September 15:31
Nice summary of the current situation plus the results of a yes/no here:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29176891
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29176891
rovermorris999 said:
Oops. No EU for 5 years according to the Spanish
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
Just saw that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
Absolutely torpedoes Salmond's claims - Scotland emphatically will not be in the EU for at least half a decade. At LEAST.
Funk said:
rovermorris999 said:
Oops. No EU for 5 years according to the Spanish
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
Just saw that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
Absolutely torpedoes Salmond's claims - Scotland emphatically will not be in the EU for at least half a decade. At LEAST.
ITV's Tom Bradbury said:
I have a confession this morning, which is that I am not enjoying covering the Scottish referendum. I should be. All journalists live for the chance to report on great events and they don’t come more momentous than the potential break-up of the UK.
But pretty much all reporters I chatted to yesterday agreed that the level of abuse and even intimidation being meted out by some in the ‘Yes’ campaign was making this referendum a rather unpleasant experience.
And whilst I am sure both signs have been guilty, the truth - uncomfortable as it is to say it – is that most of the heckling and abuse does seem to be coming from the Nationalists.
I have been with ITN for 25 years and have covered events all over the world in that time. I’m not going to suggest that this bears comparison with really bad places, but it is certainly highly unusual in the democratic world.
For example, my first major job as a correspondent was in Ireland in the early nineties and, despite the fact that there was a bitter war going on all round me that took many lives, I experienced virtually no personal hostility at all from anyone. They didn’t lob accusations of bias around every time you asked a question either.
The essential trouble is that the ‘Yes’ campaign’s argument here is high on emotion, but short on sensible detail. I have said before and wholly stick to the view that their long-term analysis is pretty fair, save perhaps for some exaggeration of the revenue they are likely to glean from North Sea Oil.
Scotland has every chance of turning out something like Ireland, which, whilst it does currently run double the unemployment rate of Scotland, is evidently a (apart from the banking crisis) self-sufficient nation at ease with itself.
But the ‘Yes’ campaign here is about to bring its incipient nation into being based on an economic policy that would literally be laughed at if it were produced at Westminster.
Alex Salmond has barely set foot inside the House of Commons for a decade and yet on the question of a currency union he claims to know what politicians there are going to do better than they do themselves – and certainly better than all those Westminster analysts whose job it is to talk to these people and study their mindsets, day in day out. It is frankly absurd. Anyone who lived through the Euro crisis at Westminster knows that, but point it out and you are guaranteed a volley of abuse.
It is our job to test logic, analyse proposals, probe for intellectual weakness and to ask questions on behalf of our audience. We will continue to do that. The emotion is a matter for them.
But those in Scotland who are quick to abuse and see bias around every corner might want to think about the face they are showing the world. And the march on the BBC, complete with strangely well-prepared banners with Nick Robinson’s face on them was frankly rather sinister.
http://www.itv.com/news/2014-09-16/i-have-a-confession-to-make-i-am-not-enjoying-covering-the-scottish-referendum/But pretty much all reporters I chatted to yesterday agreed that the level of abuse and even intimidation being meted out by some in the ‘Yes’ campaign was making this referendum a rather unpleasant experience.
And whilst I am sure both signs have been guilty, the truth - uncomfortable as it is to say it – is that most of the heckling and abuse does seem to be coming from the Nationalists.
I have been with ITN for 25 years and have covered events all over the world in that time. I’m not going to suggest that this bears comparison with really bad places, but it is certainly highly unusual in the democratic world.
For example, my first major job as a correspondent was in Ireland in the early nineties and, despite the fact that there was a bitter war going on all round me that took many lives, I experienced virtually no personal hostility at all from anyone. They didn’t lob accusations of bias around every time you asked a question either.
The essential trouble is that the ‘Yes’ campaign’s argument here is high on emotion, but short on sensible detail. I have said before and wholly stick to the view that their long-term analysis is pretty fair, save perhaps for some exaggeration of the revenue they are likely to glean from North Sea Oil.
Scotland has every chance of turning out something like Ireland, which, whilst it does currently run double the unemployment rate of Scotland, is evidently a (apart from the banking crisis) self-sufficient nation at ease with itself.
But the ‘Yes’ campaign here is about to bring its incipient nation into being based on an economic policy that would literally be laughed at if it were produced at Westminster.
Alex Salmond has barely set foot inside the House of Commons for a decade and yet on the question of a currency union he claims to know what politicians there are going to do better than they do themselves – and certainly better than all those Westminster analysts whose job it is to talk to these people and study their mindsets, day in day out. It is frankly absurd. Anyone who lived through the Euro crisis at Westminster knows that, but point it out and you are guaranteed a volley of abuse.
It is our job to test logic, analyse proposals, probe for intellectual weakness and to ask questions on behalf of our audience. We will continue to do that. The emotion is a matter for them.
But those in Scotland who are quick to abuse and see bias around every corner might want to think about the face they are showing the world. And the march on the BBC, complete with strangely well-prepared banners with Nick Robinson’s face on them was frankly rather sinister.
Hopefully this will put to bed the misconception of "the whole world looking on in admiration at the way Scotland's conducting this referendum".....
=
Odds on a "Yes" vote have drifted from 4 (or 3/1) at the end of last week to 4.5 (or 7/2) on the exchange. This would mean a £100 bet would return £450 if Scotland votes for independence
=
Maybe Alex Salmond put his entire Barnett allowance on Yes, and that's how he was going to bankroll the white paper?
Odds on a "Yes" vote have drifted from 4 (or 3/1) at the end of last week to 4.5 (or 7/2) on the exchange. This would mean a £100 bet would return £450 if Scotland votes for independence
=
Maybe Alex Salmond put his entire Barnett allowance on Yes, and that's how he was going to bankroll the white paper?
At least Nick Robinson hasn't been thrown into a bin...yet...
"Angry Crowd Throw an MP in the Bin
Voter recall, Ukrainian style. If Jim Murphy and Nick Robinson thought they had it bad up north, just look what happened to the Ukrainian finance minister"
http://order-order.com/2014/09/16/angry-crowd-thro...
Love that headline! "Angry Crowd Throw an MP in the Bin"
"Angry Crowd Throw an MP in the Bin
Voter recall, Ukrainian style. If Jim Murphy and Nick Robinson thought they had it bad up north, just look what happened to the Ukrainian finance minister"
http://order-order.com/2014/09/16/angry-crowd-thro...
Love that headline! "Angry Crowd Throw an MP in the Bin"
Funk said:
rovermorris999 said:
Oops. No EU for 5 years according to the Spanish
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
Just saw that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
Absolutely torpedoes Salmond's claims - Scotland emphatically will not be in the EU for at least half a decade. At LEAST.
"Not in a million f
king years. Can you imagine the st we'd be in with the Catalans and the Basques?"Anglade said:
ITV's Tom Bradbury said:
I have a confession this morning, which is that I am not enjoying covering the Scottish referendum. I should be. All journalists live for the chance to report on great events and they don’t come more momentous than the potential break-up of the UK.
But pretty much all reporters I chatted to yesterday agreed that the level of abuse and even intimidation being meted out by some in the ‘Yes’ campaign was making this referendum a rather unpleasant experience.
And whilst I am sure both signs have been guilty, the truth - uncomfortable as it is to say it – is that most of the heckling and abuse does seem to be coming from the Nationalists.
I have been with ITN for 25 years and have covered events all over the world in that time. I’m not going to suggest that this bears comparison with really bad places, but it is certainly highly unusual in the democratic world.
For example, my first major job as a correspondent was in Ireland in the early nineties and, despite the fact that there was a bitter war going on all round me that took many lives, I experienced virtually no personal hostility at all from anyone. They didn’t lob accusations of bias around every time you asked a question either.
The essential trouble is that the ‘Yes’ campaign’s argument here is high on emotion, but short on sensible detail. I have said before and wholly stick to the view that their long-term analysis is pretty fair, save perhaps for some exaggeration of the revenue they are likely to glean from North Sea Oil.
Scotland has every chance of turning out something like Ireland, which, whilst it does currently run double the unemployment rate of Scotland, is evidently a (apart from the banking crisis) self-sufficient nation at ease with itself.
But the ‘Yes’ campaign here is about to bring its incipient nation into being based on an economic policy that would literally be laughed at if it were produced at Westminster.
Alex Salmond has barely set foot inside the House of Commons for a decade and yet on the question of a currency union he claims to know what politicians there are going to do better than they do themselves – and certainly better than all those Westminster analysts whose job it is to talk to these people and study their mindsets, day in day out. It is frankly absurd. Anyone who lived through the Euro crisis at Westminster knows that, but point it out and you are guaranteed a volley of abuse.
It is our job to test logic, analyse proposals, probe for intellectual weakness and to ask questions on behalf of our audience. We will continue to do that. The emotion is a matter for them.
But those in Scotland who are quick to abuse and see bias around every corner might want to think about the face they are showing the world. And the march on the BBC, complete with strangely well-prepared banners with Nick Robinson’s face on them was frankly rather sinister.
http://www.itv.com/news/2014-09-16/i-have-a-confession-to-make-i-am-not-enjoying-covering-the-scottish-referendum/But pretty much all reporters I chatted to yesterday agreed that the level of abuse and even intimidation being meted out by some in the ‘Yes’ campaign was making this referendum a rather unpleasant experience.
And whilst I am sure both signs have been guilty, the truth - uncomfortable as it is to say it – is that most of the heckling and abuse does seem to be coming from the Nationalists.
I have been with ITN for 25 years and have covered events all over the world in that time. I’m not going to suggest that this bears comparison with really bad places, but it is certainly highly unusual in the democratic world.
For example, my first major job as a correspondent was in Ireland in the early nineties and, despite the fact that there was a bitter war going on all round me that took many lives, I experienced virtually no personal hostility at all from anyone. They didn’t lob accusations of bias around every time you asked a question either.
The essential trouble is that the ‘Yes’ campaign’s argument here is high on emotion, but short on sensible detail. I have said before and wholly stick to the view that their long-term analysis is pretty fair, save perhaps for some exaggeration of the revenue they are likely to glean from North Sea Oil.
Scotland has every chance of turning out something like Ireland, which, whilst it does currently run double the unemployment rate of Scotland, is evidently a (apart from the banking crisis) self-sufficient nation at ease with itself.
But the ‘Yes’ campaign here is about to bring its incipient nation into being based on an economic policy that would literally be laughed at if it were produced at Westminster.
Alex Salmond has barely set foot inside the House of Commons for a decade and yet on the question of a currency union he claims to know what politicians there are going to do better than they do themselves – and certainly better than all those Westminster analysts whose job it is to talk to these people and study their mindsets, day in day out. It is frankly absurd. Anyone who lived through the Euro crisis at Westminster knows that, but point it out and you are guaranteed a volley of abuse.
It is our job to test logic, analyse proposals, probe for intellectual weakness and to ask questions on behalf of our audience. We will continue to do that. The emotion is a matter for them.
But those in Scotland who are quick to abuse and see bias around every corner might want to think about the face they are showing the world. And the march on the BBC, complete with strangely well-prepared banners with Nick Robinson’s face on them was frankly rather sinister.
Hopefully this will put to bed the misconception of "the whole world looking on in admiration at the way Scotland's conducting this referendum".....
rovermorris999 said:
Oops. No EU for 5 years according to the Spanish
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
One of the comments to that article by jocklandjohn stateshttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
jocklandjohn said:
Another aspect to new accession countries is the VAT position. All new applicants for EU membership are required to adopt the common VAT system. This REQUIRES VAT to be charged on all taxable supplies (Including all the zero-rated categories that apply now in the UK such as food, new homes, books, children's clothes etc etc). Zero-rating will not be permitted to an independent Scotland as this was a special opt out granted to the UK. At best maybe one or two reduced rates may be allowed (recent admissions have I think never had more than 2 such derogations). The minimum reduced rate is 5% and the minimum standard rate is 15%.
What we therefore face is at least 5% VAT on perhaps food and something else and a minimum rate of VAT of 15% on the other categories where the UK pays no VAT at all.
Is this true? Are new EU members required to have VAT on everything?What we therefore face is at least 5% VAT on perhaps food and something else and a minimum rate of VAT of 15% on the other categories where the UK pays no VAT at all.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff