Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

Scottish Politics 2011-2017


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.
  • Weather Preferences: very cold frosty days, blizzards, very hot weather, floods, storms
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.

    If Scotland don't know what currency they will be having. The rUK will be no idea what flag will be having. In Cardiff, Wales only 7 people turns up for the no campaign. This picture shows the strength of the yes campaign in Wales:

    This is from twitter.

     

     

     

     

    BxayCqqIEAAO-K4.jpg

     
    Edited by pip22
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Spotted a post you think may be an issue? Please help the team by reporting it.
    • Replies 30.9k
    • Created
    • Last Reply

    Top Posters In This Topic

    • Scottish-Irish Skier

      8874

    • mountain shadow

      1528

    • skifreak

      1435

    • frogesque

      1306

    Top Posters In This Topic

    Popular Posts

    And that ignorant, offensive, rant sums up exactly why the YES campaign failed  

    Good god. What a load of boarish spiteful bile from bad losers has been posted during the night. I actually dread to think how Scotland would be run if this is representative of how the yes vote behav

    I'm disappointed in the lack of grace shown by some across the net in accepting this No vote. A complete lack of any empathy and understanding as to why fellow Scots didn't vote Yes.   I personally

    Posted Images

    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    Latest Survation poll for BT:

     

    49 No

    42 Yes

     

    Without DK's 54/46,

     

    A caveat as its been done for BT, I've looked at the question order and there doesn't seem to be any dodgy goings on but personally I prefer to see polls done not for either side.

     

    Just looked at the methodology, bizarre to say the least, getting two responses from the same household even though in that case they weighted them only as 0.5.

     

    It's clear this poll was rushed out to feed into a bounce back narrative for No.

     

    I'd advise Yes to get a poll out quickly showing some good news, even if its let say a bit dodgy, narrative at this point of a campaign can be important.

    Edited by nick sussex
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: @scotlandwx
  • Weather Preferences: Crystal Clear High Pressure & Blue Skies
  • Location: @scotlandwx

    Survation poll prepared on behalf of Better Together released. 

     

    54 % No to 46% Yes - excluding DKs

     

    http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Better-Together-Voting-Intention-Tables.pdf

     

    Voting Intention

     

    49 % No to 42% Yes with 9% DKs

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Lochgelly - Highest town in Fife at 150m ASL.
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and cold. Enjoy all extremes though.
  • Location: Lochgelly - Highest town in Fife at 150m ASL.

    I'm reading 54% NO, 46% YES - latest Survation poll ?

    Sorry! must have collided with other posts.

    Edited by Blitzen
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: @scotlandwx
  • Weather Preferences: Crystal Clear High Pressure & Blue Skies
  • Location: @scotlandwx

    Approx 400k undecided out there then....

     

    post-7292-0-50794600-1410617408_thumb.pn

     

    Some interesting demographic and regional data in here, especially so if we have the further poll out later today.

     

    Look forward to SS forensics..

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    But the lady has just admitted she doesn't mix with yes supporters!Ispend my life with 70% no people.So what is the point in trying to get reasoned debate if you only have people confirming your views.You mention Scotland has done well.We have the lowest life expectancy in the UK under the union.You mention national security.Explain to me why indie Scotland would be less secure than the UK? When we can site Iraq as an example of a complete hash and illegal at that.We have more extremists in England than any other country in Europe.We have nuclear weapons that cost billions but stop nothing.The terrorists see Us/UK as their enemies.Why because we keep bombing them and propping up other nations against them.The UK cannot stop terrorism we have proved that.Also why are 1 in 10 people using food banks in this wealthy nation.Why is our army in Scotland half the size it was 10 years ago.Is that increased defence.You see the part I find really patronising is that a lot of no people only see their own bank balance and don't think about the poor,unemployed,homeless alienated disenfranchised.They want to keep the union as it is as they are doing OK out of it.I want us all to do better.The big issue seller has as much right as the big banker or middle class lady to a better life.We cannot change things in the UK the gap between rich andpor is growing not narrowing.All this talk about big players global security is just fatuous nonsense.

    Edited by November13
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: glasgow
  • Weather Preferences: snowy winters hot summers
  • Location: glasgow

    Nov13. Here's one to debate then. SNP are pro EU but as things stand entry into the EU, which is highly likely but not certain, currently stipulates adoption on the Euro.

    Therefore at some stage Scotland would be straight jacketed economically not by Westminster but Brussels.

    BTW I'm not ukip.

    "We can choose not to adopt the the Euro" isn't an acceptable answer IMHO because I believe as EU law stands you can't..unlike saying we can keep the pound which by Sterlingization you can.

    Is that not swapping the devil you know (WM) for one you dont?

    This a genuine point to which if I had the vote would concern me.

    Thanks.

    ok kar . I believe ss and others like skifreak have already answered this question many times on this thread.

     

    heres a copy of an answer to this question from the wbb

     

     

    Q: “But won’t we have to join the Euro?â€

    A: No. EU member states CANNOT be forced to join the Euro. In order to do so, states must first join the ERM2 (“Exchange Rate Mechanismâ€) programme for a minimum of two years, and membership of ERM2 is entirely voluntary. All an EU member has to do to stay out of the Euro is not sign up forERM2 [110].

    The European Commission’s website notes that:

    “Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Sweden do not currently have a target date for adoption of the euroâ€.

    In fact, Scotland couldn’t join the Euro even if it wanted to, as it doesn’t meet the qualifying criteria[112].

     

    "Each of the new Member States shall participate in Economic and Monetary Union from the date of accession as a Member State with a derogation within the meaning of Article 122 of the EC Treaty"
     
    Article 122 of the EC Treaty has now been replaced by Articles 139 and 140 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). If you stop at this point, the argument seems won - all new members "shall participate" in the single currency. However, there is another step. We need, also, to look at what Articles 139 and 140 TFEU actually say.
     
    These articles apply to all Member States without a euro opt out, whether old or new, whether accession or not. Article 139 TFEU sets out that "Member States with a derogation" do not participate in the single currency or monetary union. Article 140 TFEU then makes clear that euro membership is not automatic. In order to join the euro, a Member State has to satisfy certain criteria, including currency convergence as part of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM II).
     
    So what are the rules for participation in ERM II? These are set out in the 16 June 1997 Resolution of the European Council establishing the Exchange Rate Mechanism and the 16th March 2006 agreement between the European Central Bank and the national central banks of the Member States outside the euro area. These make clear "participation in ERM II is voluntary for the non-euro area Member States"
     
    So, in summary, the Treaties make clear that a Member State can't join the euro without demonstrating currency convergence as part of ERM II "for at least two years" and because Scotland (or any other Member State, old or new) can choose whether or not to join ERM II, we can't be forced to join the euro. There is a point of decision - whether or not to join the Exchange Rate Mechanism - which is ours to take, and if we don't join ERM II, we won't be joining the euro.
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Sth Staffs/Shrops 105m/345' & NW Snowdonia 219m/719'
  • Location: Sth Staffs/Shrops 105m/345' & NW Snowdonia 219m/719'

    It's a great point Kar - with entry to Europe comes the adoption of the Euro.

     

    Wouldn't it be surreal to see potentially iScot into Europe -  at the very same time rUK are having a referendum to leave Europe...

     

    This is one of the uncertainties that is part of a future neither side can predict.

     

    Is that not swapping the devil you know (WM) for one you dont?

     

    For many Yes voters having your own government to deal with either devil is the more important issue.

     

    Good response Lorenzo. Thanks.

     

    I'm just too old and risk averse to be "winging it" with such high stakes.. I respect others aren't and will be voting with the hearts on their sleeves. :)

     

    The UK or rUK  IN/OUT EU referendum, if it happens, will be interesting but whatever it's outcome, in or out, thankfully we wont be part of the Eurozone.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Peterborough
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and frost in the winter. Hot and sunny, thunderstorms in the summer.
  • Location: Peterborough

     

     

    They want to keep the union as it is as they are doing OK out of it.

    Surely that is as good a reason as any, lets be honest no-one really knows how Scotland will do post-independence (if it happens of course). There is a risk/reward balance to address and if you are doing fine with the status quo then you are more likely to take a more cautious stance. I don't see that as being patronising.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.
  • Weather Preferences: very cold frosty days, blizzards, very hot weather, floods, storms
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.

    Most hilarious warning from the ''No'' Camp saying Putin will invade Scotland if she votes yes.  :rofl:

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    Better together are alleging the postal exit poll is 40% yes and 60% no.Even the most biased observer would not believe they have a 20% lead.Incredible nonsense.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Sth Staffs/Shrops 105m/345' & NW Snowdonia 219m/719'
  • Location: Sth Staffs/Shrops 105m/345' & NW Snowdonia 219m/719'

     

    ok kar . I believe ss and others like skifreak have already answered this question many times on this thread.

     

    heres a copy of an answer to this question from the wbb

     

     

     

    Thanks Balmaha. I hadn't read those earlier posts .. this thread is so long. :)

     

    I'm happy to take that answer on face value but that was not my understanding for new independent members states so I will go away and research some more.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Peterborough
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and frost in the winter. Hot and sunny, thunderstorms in the summer.
  • Location: Peterborough

    Addressing something I said last night about offering devolution at the last minute. Here is a tory MPs take, from the referendum stream on the bbc.

     

    A Conservative MP has told the BBC it is possible that Conservative members of the House of Commons could prevent the new powers and timetable outlined by Labour ex-prime minister Gordon Brown on behalf of Better Together from getting through the UK Parliament.

    Speaking on Radio 4's The Week in Westminster Christopher Chope, MP for Christchurch, said: "'Devo max' is not an issue for the Scots alone, it's an issue for the whole of the United Kingdom. So if there is a No vote, then if there's any discussion about a realignment of the powers and responsibilities within the United Kingdom constitution, that should be a matter for the House of Commons as a whole, and it should be a proper balance between the interests of those in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and those in Scotland."

    Soft yes voters should not be swayed by the new offer of increased devolution by the no campaign. It would probably struggle to get passed in the house of commons and hence probably an empty promise.

    Edited by Captain shortwave
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: glasgow
  • Weather Preferences: snowy winters hot summers
  • Location: glasgow

    Thanks Balmaha. I hadn't read those earlier posts .. this thread is so long. :)

     

    I'm happy to take that answer on face value but that was not my understanding for new independent members states so I will go away and research some more.

    no problem kar.  :good:

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    Better together are alleging the postal exit poll is 40% yes and 60% no.Even the most biased observer would not believe they have a 20% lead.Incredible nonsense.

    How on earth would they get that information? also it seems a bit daft to be saying you have a huge lead there which might make No voters on the day less inclined to turn out.

     

    Unless the Survation poll included further questions on whether people had already voted but even then it would be a small sample.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Central Falkirk
  • Location: Central Falkirk

    But the lady has just admitted she doesn't mix with yes supporters!Ispend my life with 70% no people.So what is the point in trying to get reasoned debate if you only have people confirming your views.You mention Scotland has done well.We have the lowest life expectancy in the UK under the union.You mention national security.Explain to me why indie Scotland would be less secure than the UK? When we can site Iraq as an example of a complete hash and illegal at that.We have more extremists in England than any other country in Europe.We have nuclear weapons that cost billions but stop nothing.The terrorists see Us/UK as their enemies.Why because we keep bombing them and propping up other nations against them.The UK cannot stop terrorism we have proved that.Also why are 1 in 10 people using food banks in this wealthy nation.Why is our army in Scotland half the size it was 10 years ago.Is that increased defence.You see the part I find really patronising is that a lot of no people only see their own bank balance and don't think about the poor,unemployed,homeless alienated disenfranchised.They want to keep the union as it is as they are doing OK out of it.I want us all to do better.The big issue seller has as much right as the big banker or middle class lady to a better life.We cannot change things in the UK the gap between rich andpor is growing not narrowing.All this talk about big players global security is just fatuous nonsense.

     

    November, you clearly have strong views, but I don't share them - and I don't lack debate because it's all over the media, and because the few 'yes' supporters I know, including members of my own family, are evangelical in their beliefs, and rarely miss a chance to try to convert me to their way of thinking ;-).

     

    I understand very well why 'yes' supporters think as they do - but I don't share their views. I can disagree with every single one of your points, but you wouldn't accept anything I said because I'm from the 'other' side, and where you see black and white, I see only shades of grey. For instance - I think Scotland's relatively poor  health record is way more complicated than just 'deprivation'. I think the need for / use of food-banks is terrible, but not confined to the UK, and not at all the only example of charity starting at home. I believe passionately that the nuclear deterrent is what's kept the world globally safe for the past seventy years. I think wars are horrible things wherever and whenever they occur - but also that making war is part of human nature and that wars will only be eliminated when women rule the world (just joking, sort of..). Big issue sellers should be helped as much as possible, and already are, by our welfare state; but no government can ever eliminate the causes of societal misfortune which are caused all too often by family break-up, and addiction problems arising from too-available drugs and alcohol. Those people sleeping rough on the streets are (generally) choosing to do so - and a majority of 'Big Issue' sellers are going back to state-provided housing or charitable hostels at the end of the day. No-one needs to go truly hungry in Scotland, and help is out there for people who need it. I accept that some people fall through the safety net, but you show me a country anywhere in the world where that doesn't ever happen. That paradise doesn't exist. 

     

    When you say 'I want us all to do better', how exactly do you think that can happen? It's a laudable aim, but not so easy to deliver in the real world, and increasingly difficult as technology and prosperity make us all happier, supposedly but in fact just multiply the opportunities for us fallible humans to go horribly wrong in the choices we can suddenly make.  In fact 'I want us all to do better' sounds like just so much political hot air. You sound as if you've been listening to too many politicians. Idealism is great, but no way to run a country. I might even call it 'fatuous nonsense'.

    Edited by decomm18
    • Like 8
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Sth Staffs/Shrops 105m/345' & NW Snowdonia 219m/719'
  • Location: Sth Staffs/Shrops 105m/345' & NW Snowdonia 219m/719'

    no problem kar.  :good:

     

    I read the technicalities and so on paper it's doable.... still a big ask though IMHO to be the first new member state , if accepted, not to have to go down the Euro route (or been seen to attempt to do so..

     

    Earlier this year, European Commission President José Manuel Barroso handed a boost to British Prime Minister David Cameron, who backs the No campaign.

    Barroso said in an interview in February Scotland would have to reapply to join the EU.

    The Commission says that’s the way things stand today.

    “This position, that has not changed, is on the record. It is not our role ten days before the vote to interfere in the campaign with new statements that will be taken up partly here and there,†said Pia Ahrenkilde Hansen, a spokeswoman for the EU executive.

    Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond insists that an independent Scotland would remain inside the EU.

    But Vivien Pertusot of the French Institute of International Relations told Euronews that Scotland “will have to apply for membership.â€

    “The bigger risk is if Scotland arrives with lots of demands: if it applies to the EU – we don’t want the euro, we don’t want to be part of Schengen. That’s going to be extremely difficult for Scotland to have all those opt-outs that it has been enjoying as a UK member.â€

     

     

    Being a member of the euro is a core element of the EU project – as fundamental as committing to the free movement of goods and services, persons and capital. Indeed, the use of a common currency is regarded in EU theory as an aspect of the free movement of capital. Even the two countries that (being members of the EU before the euro was agreed) negotiated opt-outs – the UK and Denmark – have until very recently been treated as "pre-ins" (i.e. countries expected to join the euro eventually) rather than permanent outs.

    Since the euro was agreed to, the EU has not accepted any new member that did not commit to joining. And indeed, over time, when they qualified, the new countries that joined the EU have indeed been joining the euro. The Eurozone had 11 members in 1999, then Greece joined in 2001 (12), Slovenia in 2007 (13), Cyprus and Malta in 2008 (15), Slovakia in 2009 (16), Estonia in 2011 (17), and Latvia in 2014 (18). Lithuania is scheduled to join in January 2015 (19), Croatia in 2019 (20), Hungary in 2020 (21). The Czech Republic aims to join in 2017 and Romania hopes to join in 2020 – making 23 members by 2020. The EU would not allow Scotland to join unless it agreed to join the euro and made good faith attempts to qualify. The SNP's apparent policy of joining saying it would try to qualify for the euro and then never getting around to it would be totally unacceptable to other EU members and would not be accepted..

     

     

    Negotiations will be interesting especially with Spain and others with separatist issues having to all agree.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Dumfries, South West Scotland.
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and cold in winter and dry and very warm in summer
  • Location: Dumfries, South West Scotland.

    Despite the fact that i've been otherwise engaged, this thread has stormed on regardless ;)  600 pages... impressive

     

    Here, in Stirling, there are far more 'yes' stickers than back in Dumfries. Although, today the 'no thanks' stands are here so there are lots of 'naw' stickers too. Much more in your face than in Dumfries. 

     

    I wonder what all that actually achieves... I mean a wee old man with 'no thanks' leaflets tried to give them to me and i said "i've already voted No". I didn't want to get in a confrontation with him. Notice the - over 65, nice, pleasant, wouldn't touch a fly characteristics. ie BT trying to strengthen their core vote.

    I'm guessing Stirling will vote Yes? or is it pretty 50/50?

     

    By contrast, the Yes camp were in the high street yesterday. young, slightly hipster and had the Scottish socialist party behind them giving out leaflets. Appealing to the student population probably... Absolutely hated the boy we were talking to as he was incredibly arrogant and aggressive towards my friend who said he voted no (i didn't want to initially get involved). He turned down my invitation for a 'square go' (after he had got all hot and bothered about my criticisms of mixing with socialists who poll like nothing in GEs) . I thought it was the 'no' camp that were 'fearties' ;)

     

     

    That ICM poll was pretty good for YES i'd say.

     

     

    November - Your criticism of the orange order is fair enough but there are nasty elements such as the 'Green Brigade' too. Sectarianism doesn't just lie with the Protestants/ Rangers fans you do realise

     

     

    Also, i sympathise with decorum's post. I would argue that an independent Scotland could work in conjunction with rUK. Why couldn't we work together? I disagree that the UK is to blame with all foreign problems re terrorism. I don't have a problem with, for example, the USA's present tactics towards ISIS.

    I'd prefer to intervene, to a certain degree, if thousands of innocent people were going to be killed... all in the name of Islam.

     

    I'd argue, the reason why people should vote YES is because we could be an incredibly rich country. We lose money being part of the UK. If we use our resources in the correct way then we can achieve great things, things which Westminster seem incapable of delivering.

     

    For me, and for many others - many of those who will decide this referendum, it's not really about self-determination. It's more a gamble on what we could be.

     

    The majority of opinion does want the pound. Those that don't want the pound are very much in the minority but i do think our own currency could survive and be viable. I firmly believe the euro to be disastrous, I'm sure the SNP know endorsing that would be political suicide. I'd like to see them categorically rule that out.

     

    It will be an interesting last few days and the aftermath reaction :) 

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    Approx 400k undecided out there then....

     

    attachicon.gifSurvation Table.PNG

     

    Some interesting demographic and regional data in here, especially so if we have the further poll out later today.

     

    Look forward to SS forensics..

    Highlands sees 5% DK from 20% in the last week?! And Yes now taking the lead?

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    Inverness High St today in attachment.

    post-8058-0-29825700-1410621096_thumb.jp

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.
  • Weather Preferences: very cold frosty days, blizzards, very hot weather, floods, storms
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRw35hGU1HA

     

    Good reasons to vote yes.  :) 

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.
  • Weather Preferences: very cold frosty days, blizzards, very hot weather, floods, storms
  • Location: Clayton-Le-Woods, Chorley 59m asl.

    Heres a video for the No side:

     

     

    I do respect the ''No'' Campaign by giving you lot this.

     

     

    Edited by pip22
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level
  • Location: Maddiston , Falkirk, Scotland 390ft above sea level

    In the interests of clarity about my credentials.Not 15.44 Honours degree in psychology,HNC Business studies,worked in insurance industry for 16 years,ran for Scotland internationally,been in SNP since 18,studied Scottish history and economics my whole adult life.I am technically middle class in every definition.But I believe Scotland is held back by the union.I believe even in my own field the big jobs are kept for London.I don't see why I should have to go to London to get a better job.I have witnessed every large Scottish insurance company being taken over and the jobs quickly moving down south under this fabulous union.There are no real opportunities within my industry other than back room administration.Do I want this to continue no I want change.So when I hear guff bout brass plates being moved after independence it makes me laugh.They decimated my industry years ago.And do you know why this thread makes me curse sometimes.Its not people coming on who are regulars and generally well informed about Scotland.Its the trolls and occasional toe dippers with opinions but no knowledge of politics,economics or Scotland.Frankie Boyle said opinion without knowledge is useless white noise.He said of course celebrities have the right to opinion on Scotland the same way he has the right to opinion on the Hedron collider.In other words its not valid if its just throwing opinion around for the sake of it.The lady who thinks social justice and deprivation is not the UKs fault.Who's fault is it then?We have had 300 years to get it right and Scotland is still thesik man of the UK.In reward for our loyalty Westminster takes our oil gives us some of our own money back and then puts nuclear weapons on the doorstep of our biggest city.That's the crazy world of the Scottish sycophantic loyal UK subjects.Well heres something to consider.The days of bullying and Stockholm syndrome are over.I will not be bullied or intimidated.The UK government and media are corupt but they ain't fooling me.

    Edited by November13
    • Like 5
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    Heres a video for the No side:

     

     

    I do respect the ''No'' Campaign by giving you lot this.

    I don't even know where to begin with this video.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Central Falkirk
  • Location: Central Falkirk

    In the interests of clarity about my credentials.Not 15.44 Honours degree in psychology,HNC Business studies,worked in insurance industry for 16 years,ran for Scotland internationally,been in SNP since 18,studied Scottish history and economics my whole adult life.I am technically middle class in every definition.But I believe Scotland is held back by the union.I believe even in my own field the big jobs are kept for London.I don't see why I should have to go to London to get a better job.I have witnessed every large Scottish insurance company being taken over and the jobs quickly moving down south under this fabulous union.There are no real opportunities within my industry other than back room administration.Do I want this to continue no I want change.So when I hear guff bout brass plates being moved after independence it makes me laugh.They decimated my industry years ago.And do you know why this thread makes me curse sometimes.Its not people coming on who are regulars and generally well informed about Scotland.Its the trolls and occasional toe dippers with opinions but no knowledge of politics,economics or Scotland.Frankie Boyle said opinion without knowledge is useless white noise.He said of course celebrities have the right to opinion on Scotland the same way he has the right to opinion on the Hedron collider.In other words its not valid if its just throwing opinion around for the sake of it.The lady who thinks social justice and deprivation is not the UKs fault.Who's fault is it then?We have had 300 years to get it right and Scotland is still thesik man of the UK.In reward for our loyalty Westminster takes our oil gives us some of our own money back and then puts nuclear weapons on the doorstep of our biggest city.That's the crazy world of the Scottish sycophantic loyal UK subjects.Well heres something to consider.The days of bullying and Stockholm syndrome are over.I will not be bullied or intimidated.The UK government and media are corupt but they ain't fooling me.

     

    November, I don't doubt your credentials at all, and you're entitled to your opinion and your beliefs. I also feel your pain - in my industry too all of the senior jobs and decision-making has gone south, leaving us up here just to do the actual  work. But you take your choice in this - and for me the penalty of not wearing the 'big boots' is outweighed by the far better quality of life I experience in Scotland. It's not perfect, but like I said before, nowhere is.

    No, I don't think social injustice and deprivation is the UK's fault, because I don't think it's anyone's fault - it just 'is'. We've come on hugely in this over the past hundred years, but eliminating these evils entirely is an idealist's dream. World history proves it. Even Nordic countries have an underclass, and societal problems. They aren't post-industrial societies like Scotland is, which for me explains why they're ahead of us, for now.

     

    For the record, I'm not anti-independence at all - just anti this kind of independence. For me, a dream of an independent Scotland looks like a strong and mature country collaborating with rUK to plan a careful move to full independence, not this ill-natured  and hurried split we're facing now (maybe). I hope for a future where Scotland retains all receipts - including oil and gas - and pays into the rUK for a share of mutually agreed strategies, including defence, large infrastructure projects, and a shared foreign policy. We'd be full partners with rUK, economically independent with our own currency and central bank, having had a transition period to build up our own reserves, and to demonstrate to international markets that we are to be trusted. I don't think the current relationship with rUK is broken, but that's not to say that it couldn't be improved upon ;-). It might take a decade, but it would be worth the wait, for me at least.

    • Like 4
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...