Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 2

[Edinburger]

ViperPict said:

mcdjl said:

ViperPict said:

mcdjl said:

London424 said:

I've read that link a few times now and I'm still not sure what it means. What is the reference to 26,000 responses?

They're trying to make it sound good that they asked 26,000 people 'do you want a referendum?' and 1,000 said no, 3,000 said yes and 22,000 said don't care really just shut up when going on.

This shows how little some folk on here are actually following the events relating to the referendum! The SG invited Scots to provide their views on the forthcoming referendum (not independence per se) some time ago. The NO campaign did the same thing and only got a fraction of the responses. It was discussed quite a lot on the previous thread.

I'm quite sure that it'll show that the majority of those responding wanted the Devo-Max option on the ballot paper...

Ah sorry in which case the question was what are your views on a referendum? and the answers were 1000, a waste of time, 3000 independence, 22000 don't really care. Or more likely 13000 waste of time/ no, 13000 lets have it/independence and the remainder of Scotland who didn't say anything really don't care.
If it does show that a majority wanted Devo-max on the paper its telling that Salmond appears to have sold them out.

I think the fact that you respond to a consultation on something suggests that you have an opinion (i.e., care) one way or the other...

Exactly.

[Edinburger]

TheHeretic said:

Edinburger said:

That can't possibly be right as it would suggest that people in Englandshire wave flags and we're repeatedley told that flag waving is done by Scots. How strange.

But that bunting isn't in lieu of political discussion. It is just a celebration. Surely you understand the point being made here? You have been pointed to it often enough.

I was being sarcastic

[TheHeretic]

Edinburger said:

I was being sarcastic

So you had no point to make... At all... Gotcha.

[Rollin]

Edinburger said:

Caulkhead said:

Edinburger said:

ViperPict said:

Anyway, this angle suggests that Scameron is just playing lip service to the independence issue...

[url]http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4583232/David-Cameron-has-just-27-seconds-to-save-the-Union.html[url]

Not sure if he cares or not about the Union, hard to tell.

Apologies in advance for the poor quality of the linked periodical, I don't subscribe to it.

Given that we have more pandas in Scotland than Conservative MPs I doubt very much if he cares that much.

Probably just lip service. We know all about the Labour vote, etc., etc.

I've explained the internal tory view before - long term losing 5m socialist voters is a good thing, short term, no leader of any political party wants to preside over the separation of Scotland from the union.

It's not really lip service, it's just not that important in the grand scale of things and unlike Scotland which needs to take a huge leap of faith, the rest of the UK remains in pretty much the same place with or without Scotland.

And there's part of the problem... do you really think the rest of the UK would just wave Scotland goodbye and carry on as if nothing has happened? Think about it.

The problem is, you want independence but you're more desperate for the rest of the UK to be bothered if you go.

If it wasn't costing the rest of us money, pretty much no one would be bothered. If everyone in the UK voted on this issue, you'd have your independence. Cutting off your nose to spite your face.

[Edinburger]

TheHeretic said:

Edinburger said:

I was being sarcastic

So you had no point to make... At all... Gotcha.

Pot and kettle springs to mind

[Edinburger]

Rollin said:

Edinburger said:

Caulkhead said:

Edinburger said:

ViperPict said:

Anyway, this angle suggests that Scameron is just playing lip service to the independence issue...

[url]http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4583232/David-Cameron-has-just-27-seconds-to-save-the-Union.html[url]

Not sure if he cares or not about the Union, hard to tell.

Apologies in advance for the poor quality of the linked periodical, I don't subscribe to it.

Given that we have more pandas in Scotland than Conservative MPs I doubt very much if he cares that much.

Probably just lip service. We know all about the Labour vote, etc., etc.

I've explained the internal tory view before - long term losing 5m socialist voters is a good thing, short term, no leader of any political party wants to preside over the separation of Scotland from the union.

It's not really lip service, it's just not that important in the grand scale of things and unlike Scotland which needs to take a huge leap of faith, the rest of the UK remains in pretty much the same place with or without Scotland.

And there's part of the problem... do you really think the rest of the UK would just wave Scotland goodbye and carry on as if nothing has happened? Think about it.

The problem is, you want independence but you're more desperate for the rest of the UK to be bothered if you go.

If it wasn't costing the rest of us money, pretty much no one would be bothered. If everyone in the UK voted on this issue, you'd have your independence. Cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Ha ha, no, not at all!

I'm just fascinated by the view that many of you have which is that it would just be a case of removing the blue from the Union Jack, waving us goodbye, and it's business as usual.

The fact is that Scotland and rUK are so heavily integrated that it will take years and significant time and spend to both sides, should we leave the UK.

[Mojocvh]

AstonZagato said:

People who work in green energy, who need state subsidy.

I doubt that you have had any experience of long term unemployment.

[mcdjl]

Edinburger said:

ViperPict said:

mcdjl said:

ViperPict said:

This shows how little some folk on here are actually following the events relating to the referendum! The SG invited Scots to provide their views on the forthcoming referendum (not independence per se) some time ago. The NO campaign did the same thing and only got a fraction of the responses. It was discussed quite a lot on the previous thread.

I'm quite sure that it'll show that the majority of those responding wanted the Devo-Max option on the ballot paper...

Ah sorry in which case the question was what are your views on a referendum? and the answers were 1000, a waste of time, 3000 independence, 22000 don't really care. Or more likely 13000 waste of time/ no, 13000 lets have it/independence and the remainder of Scotland who didn't say anything really don't care.
If it does show that a majority wanted Devo-max on the paper its telling that Salmond appears to have sold them out.

I think the fact that you respond to a consultation on something suggests that you have an opinion (i.e., care) one way or the other...

Exactly.

I know, hence my more likely answer.
I didn't reply to it: i have no strong views either way on you having a referendum really. Its more the outcome that bothers me. As Edinburger says it will take years to separate Scotland from the UK and cost everyone a fortune. I'd just like to know that either the Scots who get independence and supposedly all the benefits of it will pay, or that the benefits that they will get will be worth the rest of us paying for. So far a very woolly 'more freedom to take decisions in our own best interest' without any ability to suggest what decisions may have been taken differently either historically or potentially in the future. The best I can remember is 'more common ownership of the land', something which it appears to me SCotland is already better off than the rUk in terms of. Any suggestions as to why the SG would have less economic maneuver room seems to be shouted down as being stupid, with no real reasoning as to why that opinion is wrong. While I didn't reply to the consultation, I did write to my MP, the answer I got was basically its for the Scots to decide the English can't worry about it.
Vp: sorry for using too many words and rambling again.

[mcdjl]

mcdjl said:

Edinburger said:

ViperPict said:

mcdjl said:

ViperPict said:

This shows how little some folk on here are actually following the events relating to the referendum! The SG invited Scots to provide their views on the forthcoming referendum (not independence per se) some time ago. The NO campaign did the same thing and only got a fraction of the responses. It was discussed quite a lot on the previous thread.

I'm quite sure that it'll show that the majority of those responding wanted the Devo-Max option on the ballot paper...

Ah sorry in which case the question was what are your views on a referendum? and the answers were 1000, a waste of time, 3000 independence, 22000 don't really care. Or more likely 13000 waste of time/ no, 13000 lets have it/independence and the remainder of Scotland who didn't say anything really don't care.
If it does show that a majority wanted Devo-max on the paper its telling that Salmond appears to have sold them out.

I think the fact that you respond to a consultation on something suggests that you have an opinion (i.e., care) one way or the other...

Exactly.

While i know neither VP/Edinburger claim to be massive fans of AS any thoughts on Vp/my point in bold?

[Caulkhead]

Edinburger said:

Caulkhead said:

Edinburger said:

ViperPict said:

Anyway, this angle suggests that Scameron is just playing lip service to the independence issue...

[url]http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4583232/David-Cameron-has-just-27-seconds-to-save-the-Union.html[url]

Not sure if he cares or not about the Union, hard to tell.

Apologies in advance for the poor quality of the linked periodical, I don't subscribe to it.

Given that we have more pandas in Scotland than Conservative MPs I doubt very much if he cares that much.

Probably just lip service. We know all about the Labour vote, etc., etc.

I've explained the internal tory view before - long term losing 5m socialist voters is a good thing, short term, no leader of any political party wants to preside over the separation of Scotland from the union.

It's not really lip service, it's just not that important in the grand scale of things and unlike Scotland which needs to take a huge leap of faith, the rest of the UK remains in pretty much the same place with or without Scotland.

And there's part of the problem... do you really think the rest of the UK would just wave Scotland goodbye and carry on as if nothing has happened? Think about it.

I've thought about it in detail for a long time - I need to because I own property in Scotland, half my family live there and my BiL is an SNP candidate.

The answer is simply yes - it'll make next to bugger all difference to the remaining 90%+ that makes up the UK.

[London424]

Edinburger said:

London424 said:

TheHeretic said:

ViperPict said:

This document might make interesting reading...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-pol...

By 'details' do they mean snippets, or the whole document?

I've read that link a few times now and I'm still not sure what it means. What is the reference to 26,000 responses?

The SG ran a referendum consultation on the paper and principles which was published earlier this year. That's an impressive amount of answers and analysis.

I assume all the doom and gloom merchants on here contributed? When I asked before (Vol I) no one had.

Thanks for that. What sort of questions were asked? If its easier to link then please do.

[ViperPict]

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

Shame that you decide your position on something as important as our constitution is based on what football team you support...

No I don't, you ignorant troll.

I bet that you actually do...

[Phil1]

Edinburger said:

And there's part of the problem... do you really think the rest of the UK would just wave Scotland goodbye and carry on as if nothing has happened? Think about it.

You're really hoping someone's going to beg you to stay aren't you. Carry on flouncing.

[simoid]

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

Shame that you decide your position on something as important as our constitution is based on what football team you support...

No I don't, you ignorant troll.

I bet that you actually do...

See previous reply

[ViperPict]

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

Shame that you decide your position on something as important as our constitution is based on what football team you support...

No I don't, you ignorant troll.

I bet that you actually do...

See previous reply

Ditto

[simoid]

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

Shame that you decide your position on something as important as our constitution is based on what football team you support...

No I don't, you ignorant troll.

I bet that you actually do...

See previous reply

Ditto

Rest assured, my position on independence is based on my economic cost/benefit analysis of breaking up the UK vs not doing so, as stated months ago on this thread

[ViperPict]

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

Shame that you decide your position on something as important as our constitution is based on what football team you support...

No I don't, you ignorant troll.

I bet that you actually do...

See previous reply

Ditto

Rest assured, my position on independence is based on my economic cost/benefit analysis of breaking up the UK vs not doing so, as stated months ago on this thread

On the face of it but deep down...

[simoid]

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

Shame that you decide your position on something as important as our constitution is based on what football team you support...

No I don't, you ignorant troll.

I bet that you actually do...

See previous reply

Ditto

Rest assured, my position on independence is based on my economic cost/benefit analysis of breaking up the UK vs not doing so, as stated months ago on this thread

On the face of it but deep down...

I'd love us to be independent, but I also love being part of the UK.

Since I don't believe independence would result in greater prosperity or freedom, it's easy for me to happily vote against it.

[ViperPict]

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

simoid said:

ViperPict said:

Shame that you decide your position on something as important as our constitution is based on what football team you support...

No I don't, you ignorant troll.

I bet that you actually do...

See previous reply

Ditto

Rest assured, my position on independence is based on my economic cost/benefit analysis of breaking up the UK vs not doing so, as stated months ago on this thread

On the face of it but deep down...

I'd love us to be independent, but I also love being part of the UK.

Since I don't believe independence would result in greater prosperity or freedom, it's easy for me to happily vote against it.

Not significantly different prosperity likely. Freedom - depends on what us Scots want after independence. The fundamental issue for me is that I believe that better decisions will be made for Scotland when only Scotland needs to be considered. In national (UK) policy, Scotland's issues are only considered to a small degree. That's the only real issue. It's a 'no-brainer' for me.

[Wombat3]

ViperPict said:

Not significantly different prosperity likely. Freedom - depends on what us Scots want after independence. The fundamental issue for me is that I believe that better decisions will be made for Scotland when only Scotland needs to be considered. In national (UK) policy, Scotland's issues are only considered to a small degree. That's the only real issue. It's a 'no-brainer' for me.

But as usual you fail to articulate anything (indeed not one single thing - EVER) that is so different in respect of what Scotland needs (versus the rest of the UK) and nor anything to explain why , how & where it is so constrained today & exactly what it is that can't be achieved under the current situation

Flag waving & face paint is therefore all that is left - as usual.