# General > General >  Nor   Scot

## piratelassie

Oil rich Norway. Population 4.9 million,independent and prosperous.
Oil rich Scotland. Population 5.2 million, too wee, too poor, too stupid.
Think Independence, and please no one reply with so we are, or some other bitchy remark. Show your maturity.

----------


## Tangerine-Dream

I don't understand the question / statement so cannot reply maturely or otherwise.

----------


## Phill

With respect. With maturity.
This is, if I can even hope to grasp the mentality, a banal statement.

Comparing a possible future (semi quasi) Independent Scotland with a long established sovereign state, and then trying to bargain 50 years of known returns against a future of... well..... literally, anyone's best guess sales pitch and arse smoke blowing routine is fruitless.

Given your post, and the timing v frequency of prevous posts: Piratelassie, I suspect you may be a drunken Alex Salmond 'research' assistant / intern. And therfore, in effect, a troll.

But, always entertaining.

----------


## mi16

To base your facts on oil, Scotland would have been better going solo at the beginning of the oil boom, not the end.
Norway have been stashing funds into their oil fund since their indistry has kicked off and has a value in the region of $750 billion.
This will stanf them in good stead for the future. 
What do we have??

----------


## sids

> Scotland. Population 5.2 million, too wee,


Yes, Scottish people are not as tall as Norwegians.

----------


## golach

> Think Independence,  Show your maturity.


I have thought long and hard and am still going to vote NO, does that make me immature?

----------


## PantsMAN

> To base your facts on oil, Scotland would have been better going solo at the beginning of the oil boom, not the end.
> Norway have been stashing funds into their oil fund since their indistry has kicked off and has a value in the region of $750 billion.
> This will stanf them in good stead for the future. 
> What do we have??


Aye, maybe if the Westminster Govt. (Labour and Tory) hadn't lied about the oil we might have taken the step sooner .


"One month after former Labour Chancellor Denis Healey admitted  that his party had underplayed the value of Scottish oil in the 1970s,  new research has revealed that during the same period the Conservatives  failed to honour a pledge to set up an oil fund.    In the October 1974 General Election, the Conservative manifesto  promised that the UK government would create an oil fund for Scotland  should the party be returned to power."


"Some of the conclusions the report makes about an independent Scotland include:

The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to a quite  embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe…An exchange rate of £1 Scots to 120p sterling within two years of independence therefore seems quite probable.Thus, for the first time since the Act of Union was passed, it can  now be credibly argued that Scotland’s economic advantage lies in its  repeal.Britain is now counting so heavily on North Sea oil to redress its  balance of payments that it is easy to imagine R-UK in dire straits  without it."
From -http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/referendum/7597-more-evidence-that-scots-were-misled-over-oil-by-successive-uk-governments

Plus - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/how-black-gold-was-hijacked-north-sea-oil-and-the-betrayal-of-scotland-518697.html

----------


## equusdriving

> Oil rich Norway. Population 4.9 million,independent and prosperous.
> Oil rich Scotland. Population 5.2 million, too wee, too poor, too stupid.
> Think Independence, and please no one reply with so we are, or some other bitchy remark. Show your maturity.


Just a thought, have you ever considered using actual relevant applicable facts to back voting yes, instead of the immature bitchy anti British/English  drivel you spout? as I feel this type of bile is more likely to encourage people to vote No, rather than put all our futures in the hands of such hate filled bigots as yourself, who cannot see the future because they insist on dwelling in the past  ::

----------


## Humerous Vegetable

> Just a thought, have you ever considered using actual relevant applicable facts to back voting yes, instead of the immature bitchy anti British/English drivel you spout? as I feel this type of bile is more likely to encourage people to vote No, rather than put all our futures in the hands of such hate filled bigots as yourself, who cannot see the future because they insist on dwelling in the past


I can't see where posting facts comes under the aegis of hate-filled bigotry? Okay, he/she may have been whistling in the wind when asking for no bitchy remarks in response to the post but, thank God, you never let us down.

----------


## orkneycadian

An interesting comparison....

With Orkney and Shetland still arguably being Norwegian / Danish (some say that for a mere 50,000 florins, Norway could reclaim Orkney / Shetland after pledging them for that amount in 1468), and much of "Scotlands" oil being in waters off Orkney and Shetland, then Scotland in the traditional sense, doesnt really have very much oil to shout about anyway.  And that was at the beginning of the oil boom in the 1970's, not now when its finished!

Pirate Lassie has once more drawn attention to how it should really be.....

Oil rich Norway. Population 4,942,000,independent and prosperous.
No Oil Scotland. Population 5,158,000, too wee, too poor, too stupid.

Folks up here are getting more and more suspicious of the Neverendum and the claims of "Scotlands Oil", when all those in Edinburgh and Glasgow are about as remote from oil and petroleum as you can get.  I am sure they would even get very het up if there was a suggestion of fracking on Sachiehall or Princes streets, and would be out campaigning against it.  

So, Pirate Lassie, what will an independent Scotland give us in exchange for Orkney and Shetlands oil?

----------


## sids

After the Edinburgh tram scheme, fracking on Princes St would be a breath of fresh air.

----------


## sids

> An interesting comparison....
> 
> With Orkney and Shetland still arguably being Norwegian / Danish (some say that for a mere 50,000 florins, Norway could reclaim Orkney / Shetland after pledging them for that amount in 1468),


I think they could claim all they like. Neither Britain's nor Scotland's government would give them the islands.

----------


## orkneycadian

Maybe then, any Orcadians or Shelties could make random postings on here, generally late in the evenings after a few sherries, making some exaggerated claims about how badly we are off up here as a result of having Scottish rule imposed on us?

----------


## sids

> Maybe then, any Orcadians or Shelties could make random postings on here, generally late in the evenings after a few sherries, making some exaggerated claims about how badly we are off up here as a result of having Scottish rule imposed on us?


Freedom and whisky gang thegither!

----------


## equusdriving

> I can't see where posting facts comes under the aegis of hate-filled bigotry?


no I don't suppose you can , considering your use of "incomers" In your previous posts

----------


## equusdriving

> So, Pirate Lassie, what will an independent Scotland give us in exchange for Orkney and Shetlands oil?


 no you don't understand , its perfectly ok for an Independent Scotland to treat Orkney and Shetland, the same way that these pro-independence hypocrites are constantly whining about how the Uk government treat Scotland ::

----------


## piratelassie

What are you talking about? To mention that Scotland would be oil rich is nothing to do with the past.And dont refer to me as a hate filled bigot.



> Just a thought, have you ever considered using actual relevant applicable facts to back voting yes, instead of the immature bitchy anti British/English drivel you spout? as I feel this type of bile is more likely to encourage people to vote No, rather than put all our futures in the hands of such hate filled bigots as yourself, who cannot see the future because they insist on dwelling in the past

----------


## equusdriving

> dont refer to me as a hate filled bigot.


why does the truth hurt? and I see you have diverted away from the question you was asked, what a surprise ::

----------


## orkneycadian

> To mention that Scotland would be oil rich is nothing to do with the past.


So where, exactly, in the Central Belt (a misnomer if ever there was given that its nearly at the bottom....) is all this oil?

And taking Scotland as a whole (including the Northern Isles), where is all this oil, given that its nearly finished?  Even in the "oil rich North", the Flotta oil terminal and Scapa Flow are quiet backwaters compared to what it used to be - Maybe a tanker a month if you are lucky, compared to the numerous ones every week 35 years ago.

----------


## theone

> I think they could claim all they like. Neither Britain's nor Scotland's government would give them the islands.


I disagree.

If a referendum to stay in the UK was held in the northern isles, I'm sure the British government would listen.

The MP for Shetland has already mentioned this posibility in the event of Scottish independence.

----------


## ducati

> And you are wrong about helping people by coaching them with chapter and verse. The best way to encourage change is to encourage people to explore the issues and make their own decisions.


Maybe if you have 100 years. You (independantists) have less than 1.

----------


## golach

> Agree or not its your choice. I dont expect to influence a change in your opinion, im happy just to challenge it..


Challenge away Squidge, your pleas for an independant Scotland are falling on my and many others deaf ears. Nothing you have said so far has made me, go ....oh wait a minute maybe Squidge is right.
 I dont want to end up in a country like Iceland , Ireland, Spain, Portugal or Greece, all nearly bankrupt, in my opinion thats how Scotland will end up at the hands of the independantists.

----------


## squidge

> Maybe if you have 100 years. You (independantists) have less than 1.


IT will be a challenge - it IS a challenge but its exciting times. I will do my best and thats all that anyone can ask. BTW when did I move from being a "seperatist to an Independentist"?  Squidge the Independentist isnt as easy to trip off the tongue as Squidge the Seperatist.  :: 




> Challenge away Squidge, your pleas for an  independant Scotland are falling on my and many others deaf ears.  Nothing you have said so far has made me, go ....oh wait a minute maybe  Squidge is right.
>  I dont want to end up in a country like Iceland , Ireland, Spain,  Portugal or Greece, all nearly bankrupt, in my opinion thats how  Scotland will end up at the hands of the independantists.


Ah Golach my old friend - I have absolutely completely and utterly no expectation of changing your mind. If I succeeded in doing that I would have to go into politics because I would have to be super fantastic at it and I have NO desire to do that at all. Please do not change your mind and make me do that. 

I dont want to be any of the places you mentioned either, but why do you believe that Scotland will end up bankrupt. It has been said on this board many times and I would love to really understand why people think this is a likely situation.

----------


## ducati

> I dont want to be any of the places you mentioned either, but why do you believe that Scotland will end up bankrupt. It has been said on this board many times and I would love to really understand why people think this is a likely situation.


Ah, the crux of the matter. It doesn't matter what is or is not, nor what is likely or unlikely. The only thing that matters is what the majority of the people believe.

----------


## Phill

> So... What is your definition of true independence?


Outside of full EU membership. Own currency. Own defence. Own immigration. An entirely independent nation free from any external interference.

----------


## Phill

> Phil. Disappointing to have you imply that because I disagree with you I am being somehow daft but hey ho... Didnt take long!


That is not what I said. 

What hasn't taken long?




> the decimation of public services


Which we are seeing by the SNP in preparation for their version of independence.

----------


## squidge

> Outside of full EU membership. Own currency. Own defence. Own immigration. An entirely independent nation free from any external interference.


But isnt that Isolationism Phil? I believe that Scotland needs to be outward looking and participating in world affairs as we move further into the 21st Century?  Its not my idea of the future I would choose. Are you banking on David Cameron's referendum on getting out of Europe or are you interested in the SDA manifesto for an Independent Scotland? Seems like they might offer some of the policies you would like.




> Which we are seeing by the SNP in preparation for their version of independence.


  Well they are saying that they are against the Royal Mail Privatisation even asking for the floatation to be put off until after the referendum. (Like thats going to happen)  They appear to say there are more police officers and more nurses.  They cant be responsible for closing tax, benefit and DVLA offices - those are not devolved.  More teachers too I think.  Can you explain a bit more for me so I can have a wee look.

----------


## Rheghead

And another reason why independence is so bad is due to the nature of the demographics with respect to land ownership.  Scotland is about 40% of the size of the UK but it is owned by relatively fewer people and out of them a greater proportion are people who live south of the border.  So we will have independence but the land we walk on will be owned by foreigners whose primary interest lies with their own country.  Ther'll be too much foreign interference in an independent Scotland's affairs

In Michael Corleone's infamous words, "Keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer."  

Keep the Union.

----------


## Phill

> But isnt that Isolationism Phil?


No, independence. Why claim powers from Westminster only to hand them to Brussels whilst letting Westminster organise Scotland's currency?




> I believe that Scotland needs to be outward looking and participating in world affairs as we move further into the 21st Century?  Its not my idea of the future I would choose. Are you banking on David Cameron's referendum on getting out of Europe or are you interested in the SDA manifesto for an Independent Scotland? Seems like they might offer some of the policies you would like.


Really, No.

Still curious as to what didn't take long.

----------


## squidge

> Ah, the crux of the matter. It doesn't matter what is or is not, nor what is likely or unlikely. The only thing that matters is what the majority of the people believe.


 Thats true but whenever I ask this question I never get an answer - why do people think that Scotland will be bankrupt after Independence.  Secrets in Symmetry is fond of this point of view but never ever answers my questions - I think Im probably on ignore.  ::   What are people with the opinion that Scotland will be another Greece or Spain and bankrupt basing that opinion on? What have they read or heard that persuades them that Scotland will just crash completely?  Is there anybody willing to answer this cos I dont get it.....

----------


## squidge

> And another reason why independence is so bad is due to the nature of the demographics with respect to land ownership.  Scotland is about 40% of the size of the UK but it is owned by relatively fewer people and out of them a greater proportion are people who live south of the border.  So we will have independence but the land we walk on will be owned by foreigners whose primary interest lies with their own country.  Ther'll be too much foreign interference in an independent Scotland's affairs


The Scottish government is looking at ways to tackle this though.  The lairds are not happy and think its all too far but there are complaints that it isnt going far enough or quickly enough according to Labour - although they are taking enough time to decide what to do about the Bedroom tax ( I know I know - I keep mentioning it - thats cos i am really really annoyed about Labours complete inability to make a decision Ill try not to say it again for the next 24 hours promise!!!!) 

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politic...wers-1-3023862


Westminsters Scottish Affairs Committee are running an open consultation on this and you can send in your views until 28th October and they will publish a report within 12 months.  

http://www.parliament.uk/business/co...r-land-reform/

----------


## Rheghead

> The Scottish government is looking at ways to tackle this though.  The lairds are not happy and think its all too far but there are complaints that it isnt going far enough or quickly enough according to Labour - although they are taking enough time to decide what to do about the Bedroom tax ( I know I know - I keep mentioning it - thats cos i am really really annoyed about Labours complete inability to make a decision Ill try not to say it again for the next 24 hours promise!!!!) 
> 
> http://www.scotsman.com/news/politic...wers-1-3023862
> 
> 
> Westminsters Scottish Affairs Committee are running an open consultation on this and you can send in your views until 28th October and they will publish a report within 12 months.  
> 
> http://www.parliament.uk/business/co...r-land-reform/


Unless Alex Salmond fancies doing something Mugabe-esque, I doubt anything can be done.  So much for an Equal and Fair place to live I'd say.  It just serves to be another problem that the SNP don't have answers for.

----------


## squidge

> Unless Alex Salmond fancies doing something Mugabe-esque, I doubt anything can be done.  So much for an Equal and Fair place to live I'd say.  It just serves to be another problem that the SNP don't have answers for.


Compulsory Purchase for Tenant Farmers even when landlords dont want to sell would be a good start as suggested by Richard Lochead - the environment secretary and MSP for Moray.   It could be argued that its easier to pass land reform stuff in an Independent Scotland than in Westminster where some members of the House of Lords particularly would have a vested interest in seeing legislation fail.  Although I am sure that they would abstain on any vote which clashed with their personal interests ( like hell I am - did you see the list of politicians who supported NHS reforms and would stand to benefit personally from the legislation)!!!!

----------


## Rheghead

> Compulsory Purchase for Tenant Farmers even when landlords dont want to sell would be a good start as suggested by Richard Lochead - the environment secretary and MSP for Moray.   It could be argued that its easier to pass land reform stuff in an Independent Scotland than in Westminster where some members of the House of Lords particularly would have a vested interest in seeing legislation fail.  Although I am sure that they would abstain on any vote which clashed with their personal interests ( like hell I am - did you see the list of politicians who supported NHS reforms and would stand to benefit personally from the legislation)!!!!


Do you support Lochead's comments?

----------


## ducati

> Compulsory Purchase for Tenant Farmers even when landlords dont want to sell would be a good start as suggested by Richard Lochead - the environment secretary and MSP for Moray.   It could be argued that its easier to pass land reform stuff in an Independent Scotland than in Westminster where some members of the House of Lords particularly would have a vested interest in seeing legislation fail.  Although I am sure that they would abstain on any vote which clashed with their personal interests ( like hell I am - did you see the list of politicians who supported NHS reforms and would stand to benefit personally from the legislation)!!!!


You are for compulsary purchase by tennents of private land and against right to buy of public housing?

----------


## squidge

I dont know Rheg. I dont know if it has the backing of tenant farmers or not. There seems to be some concern that it could lead to real problems with land management and conservation and yet there needs to be a way of ensuring that farming is sustainable into the future and Family farms have a vital role to play in this.  The point is surely that both Westminster and Holyrood are looking at this issue. 
I am always suspicious of governments making stuff like this compulsory but it may be the right way to go - it depends on the reports that come back from the consultations. I DO have concerns that any legislation which makes changes would struggle if it needed to pass through the House of Lords as I have already said. 

I wouldnt presume to speak for those people who live and work on land that is owned by someone else.  I would like to see what they think about it.  Are you a tenant farmer Rheg? What do you think?

----------


## squidge

> You are for compulsary purchase by tennents of private land and against right to buy of public housing?


I am absolutely FOR the right of tennants to buy public housing where there is enough public housing to buy.  I am absolutely not For the right of people to buy their public housing where it means that other people in need cannot get social housing to live in.  One size does not fit all.  If we were renewing public housing stocks so that the housing need had or was being met then I would be absolutely happy for people to buy their social housing but we havent and we arent. 

Lets see if I can offer an example.  In some areas  - Rochdale, bolton, Greater Manchester for example - if you qualify for a council or housing association property you are directed to a website where there are houses you can choose.  The Right to buy is perhaps not an issue in these areas but see in the Highlands the housing Stock nowhere near meets the needs of those needing social housing. We should not be selling off social housing in these circumstances.

Its not the right to buy policy that is the problem as I have said on here many times I am sure - its the lack of investment in social housing.

----------


## Rheghead

> I am absolutely FOR the right of tennants to buy public housing where there is enough public housing to buy.  I am absolutely not For the right of people to buy their public housing where it means that other people in need cannot get social housing to live in.  One size does not fit all.  If we were renewing public housing stocks so that the housing need had or was being met then I would be absolutely happy for people to buy their social housing but we havent and we arent. 
> 
> Lets see if I can offer an example.  In some areas  - Rochdale, bolton, Greater Manchester for example - if you qualify for a council or housing association property you are directed to a website where there are houses you can choose.  The Right to buy is perhaps not an issue in these areas but see in the Highlands the housing Stock nowhere near meets the needs of those needing social housing. We should not be selling off social housing in these circumstances.
> 
> Its not the right to buy policy that is the problem as I have said on here many times I am sure - its the lack of investment in social housing.


Then you would be introducing a postcode lottery on where one would have the right to buy public housing.  Postcode lotteries are deemed to be unfair.

----------


## Rheghead

The point remains though that so much is promised on the grounds of Fairness and Equality by the SNP in an independent Scotland but they haven't the foggiest clue on how to deliver it.  Some of it even sounds illegal.  There doesn't seem any substance except Hope for a Dreamocracy

----------


## Rheghead

An experienced poker player has to weigh up the chances of losing against what is in the pot.  We've gone over countless times that what we would gain is independence and the Braveheart factor but we've also got a huge amount to lose like loss of international standing, economic growth, oil revenues, unfairness with land ownership, etc etc.  We need something that will tip the balance, the right to choose our own independent destiny is not enough for me.  I need to see that the fortunes of Scotland will skyrocket after independence and I'm just not seeing it.

----------


## squidge

> Then you would be introducing a postcode lottery on where one would have the right to buy public housing.  Postcode lotteries are deemed to be unfair.


Lets be clear here - the issue of equality and fairness is about the right to housing.  that is a Basic Human right and why the UN caused such a stushie last week when they said that the bedroom tax undermines that right.  The right to buy is not that and for me the right to housing trumps the right to buy.  I would howeverprefer to see social housing bought and lived in rather than lying empty for want of tenants.  So if there is available housing I dont have any problems with allowing people to buy the houses that they live in.  Where there is little available housing I would like to see investment so that everyone has that opportunity in the end but its not worth the price of people sitting on the housing list or in Bed and Breakfast Accommodation or homeless shelters or on the street or in squats. People who want to buy can usually buy somewhere else - people who NEED social housing often cant rent elsewhere. If you dont agree with me thats fine but that is my position and I am perfectly comfortable with that. 




> Some of it even sounds illegal.


Illegal?  Like what? 




> We've gone over countless  times that what we would gain is independence and the Braveheart factor  but we've also got a huge amount to lose like loss of international  standing, economic growth, oil revenues, unfairness with land ownership,  etc etc.  We need something that will tip the balance, the right to  choose our own independent destiny is not enough for me.  I need to see  that the fortunes of Scotland will skyrocket after independence and I'm  just not seeing it.


Braveheart Factor lol Rheghead!!!!! The Braveheart Factor is only ever mentioned by those opposing Independence.  Nothing is being proposed based on the "Braveheart" Factor and neither the YES campaign or the SNP have suggested that this is a reason for voting for Independence.  I only ever hear it on the No pages on facebook and out of the mouths of numpty politicians.  Its a bit of an insult to suggest that people are expecting to vote YES because of a stupid inaccurate film and that somehow the NO voters are above all that.   Its just nonsense. 

You seem to want something to tip the balance - the balance to what? Rheg - perhaps you could explain to me WHY you think an Independent Scotland cant deliver the things you mention. We have seen the figures, we have seen politicians across both parliaments agree that Scotland can be prosperous and achieve economic growth and oil revenues and there is work being done on land reform. I accept that you dont agree but I dont know why you dont agree in the face of the information that is out there.  I can understand that if you feel british and want to stay british and have a "Braveheart" :Wink:  type of attachment to the UK that you would want to vote no but if that is what it is then say so. I understand that. But if you are saying that you believe an Independent Scotland will fail in the ways you suggest - no economic growth, rubbish oil revenues, an unwillingness to implement land reform then I would like to understand why you think that.

----------


## squidge

Anyone? Rheg? Ducati? Golach? Secrets? Orkneycadian? Can anyone please tell me on why they believe Scotland will be bankrupt after Independence? Im not asking for them to justify this just for someone to tell me. I am not going to try to persuade any of you guys to change your view, I would just like to understand why you think that.

----------


## ducati

I've already explained why it is obvious to me. Not necesarily bankrupt, but very definately disadvantaged.

My own experience of doing business in Scotland for over 30 years. If you didn't work with the public sector (not my first choice) you starve. The one time I worked for a company that could only work in Scotland (franchise) and could not deal with the rest of the UK, I nearly did.  ::

----------


## squidge

Thank you Ducati. Am I right then to take from that that you believe in an Independent Scotland,  business with the rest of the UK would stop or be much harder to do than it is now?

----------


## ducati

> Thank you Ducati. Am I right then to take from that that you believe in an Independent Scotland,  business with the rest of the UK would stop or be much harder to do than it is now?


I don't know, but the point is there is so little going on in Scotland compared to the rest of the UK that it couldn't even support my little operation. This is what informs my view.

----------


## golach

Squidge, I dont believe the current government could control the finances of a "Counrty". we have seen larger countries, go virtually bankrupt all around Europe even whilst being memebers of the EU, despite the first ministers assurances that an independent Scotland will be allowed to become a member, I have my doubts.

----------


## squidge

Thank you Golach. You say current government, do you think there is any party that could run Scotland's finances or do you think we lack the ability to do this across the board?

----------


## golach

[QUOTE=squidge;1047534]Thank you Golach. You say current government, do you think there is any party that could run Scotland's finances or do you think we lack the ability to do this across the board?[/QUOTE

NO.....................................

----------


## squidge

Im not being cheeky Golach I am trying to understand. So Im sorry to ask again but Which bit of the question does no reply to? The political party or the lack of ability?

----------


## golach

> Im not being cheeky Golach I am trying to understand. So Im sorry to ask again but Which bit of the question does no reply to? The political party or the lack of ability?


Both, Scotland is no longer in its heyday, the 18th century and the age of Scottish Enlightenment, we no longer have innovators of the quality we had then.

----------


## squidge

Ok, so you think that there is no political party which could manage the budget of an Independent country and Scotland completely lacks the ability to do this across the board. Thanks Golach.

----------


## golach

> Ok, so you think that there is no political party which could manage the budget of an Independent country and Scotland completely lacks the ability to do this across the board. Thanks Golach.


Squidge, your not just a pretty face, you got it in one  :Grin:

----------


## Rheghead

> Anyone? Rheg? Ducati? Golach? Secrets? Orkneycadian? Can anyone please tell me on why they believe Scotland will be bankrupt after Independence? Im not asking for them to justify this just for someone to tell me. I am not going to try to persuade any of you guys to change your view, I would just like to understand why you think that.


I'm not saying an independent Scotland would be bankrupt. I'm just saying that Scotland is better placed to provide for and protect its citizens as part of the UK.  We will be better off together in the UK. It is only the SNP who say the Better Together campainers hold such a view.  It is easy for them to prove that lie is bogus because they belief it gives their campaign some kudos when they explain it is wrong.  It is just another bit of smoke and mirrors on behalf of the SNP by keeping the debate on their terms.

And Squidge, you are performing the trick perfectly.

----------


## squidge

> . It is only the SNP who say the Better Together campainers hold such a view.


Rheg are you kidding on? It is said repeatedly on this very forum and has been said several times in this thread that Scotland cannot afford Independence or that Scotland will be bankrupt. It has been said that there will be a mass exodus of economic refugees to England because Scotland will be too poor. Are you saying that I made up these comments?  In point of fact I KNOW that Better Together say that Scotland can be prosperous because I have said this time and time again - Even David Cameron says that Scotland can be prosperous and succeed as an Independent State.  

What I want to do Rheg is to understand what the people who say Scotland will fail economically actually mean when they say that. I have no intention of repeating the things that I have said previously to counteract their arguments - at least not at this juncture. NO doubt it will crop up again.   I thank Ducati and golach for their honest answers and I can see in amongst the snippet response you gave that you DONT think Scotland would be bankrupt.  Thank you for that.   We can maybe talk about who is best placed to provide for and look after its people in a wee while but for now I am interested in people's views about the economy.  

You give me more credit that is due Rheghead if you think that this is a trick because I dont really understand what you mean.  I said I wanted to understand and thats what I want to do.

----------


## Rheghead

> Rheg are you kidding on? It is said repeatedly on this very forum and has been said several times in this thread that Scotland cannot afford Independence or that Scotland will be bankrupt. It has been said that there will be a mass exodus of economic refugees to England because Scotland will be too poor. Are you saying that I made up these comments?  In point of fact I KNOW that Better Together say that Scotland can be prosperous because I have said this time and time again - Even David Cameron says that Scotland can be prosperous and succeed as an Independent State.  
> 
> What I want to do Rheg is to understand what the people who say Scotland will fail economically actually mean when they say that. I have no intention of repeating the things that I have said previously to counteract their arguments - at least not at this juncture. NO doubt it will crop up again.   I thank Ducati and golach for their honest answers and I can see in amongst the snippet response you gave that you DONT think Scotland would be bankrupt.  Thank you for that.   We can maybe talk about who is best placed to provide for and look after its people in a wee while but for now I am interested in people's views about the economy.  
> 
> You give me more credit that is due Rheghead if you think that this is a trick because I dont really understand what you mean.  I said I wanted to understand and thats what I want to do.


You want to understand?  I understand that you have all the answers understood already.  They seem very well rehearsed already.

----------


## Rheghead

> Rheg are you kidding on? It is said repeatedly on this very forum and has been said several times in this thread that Scotland cannot afford Independence or that Scotland will be bankrupt. It has been said that there will be a mass exodus of economic refugees to England because Scotland will be too poor. Are you saying that I made up these comments?


We would be fools to make our minds up on the basis of one or two individuals who use a bit of levity to get a point across.  Nearly everyone is guilty of that at one time or another.  So don't divert the argument of what individuals say.  That is just another way of cherry picking and performing the SNP trick again.  

"Look Look golach said Scotland will be bankrupt, I can prove otherwise, so Independence is the way to vote in 2014 because Unionists tell lies"

Hardly a logical argument, is it?? 

But there is some truth in what golach is saying.  We will be poorer as an independent nation.  Ducati has already explained, there is more going on in the south.  They are geographically placed to where all the commercial action is, Europe.  All the really struggling nations are on the edge of Europe, Greece, Iceland and Ireland.  That is no coincidence, it is a matter of taking advantages of scale and communications.  Those are the attributes which Scotland will lose if she goes independent.  

Countries only look after themselves, they only cooperate on their own terms if it suits them, not for others.  That is why we would struggle to get our goods to market on time and at low cost and why we will struggle to attract good business to Scotland.  We would be left with the crumbs as businesses start to centralise to reduce costs.  

Your socialist utopia will dry up on the motorways of England when toll charges are introduced for Scottish traffic.  Scottish demands for higher wages will go unheard when firms will pull out of Scotland to be based in the south of England.

But we will continue to attract tourism and sell wool.  They say wool is back in fashion again...

----------


## Humerous Vegetable

> We would be fools to make our minds up on the basis of one or two individuals who use a bit of levity to get a point across. Nearly everyone is guilty of that at one time or another. So don't divert the argument of what individuals say. That is just another way of cherry picking and performing the SNP trick again. 
> 
> "Look Look golach said Scotland will be bankrupt, I can prove otherwise, so Independence is the way to vote in 2014 because Unionists tell lies"
> 
> Hardly a logical argument, is it?? 
> 
> But there is some truth in what golach is saying. We will be poorer as an independent nation. Ducati has already explained, there is more going on in the south. They are geographically placed to where all the commercial action is, Europe. All the really struggling nations are on the edge of Europe, Greece, Iceland and Ireland. That is no coincidence, it is a matter of taking advantages of scale and communications. Those are the attributes which Scotland will lose if she goes independent. 
> 
> Countries only look after themselves, they only cooperate on their own terms if it suits them, not for others. That is why we would struggle to get our goods to market on time and at low cost and why we will struggle to attract good business to Scotland. We would be left with the crumbs as businesses start to centralise to reduce costs. 
> ...


You have made some good points in your post, in that Scotland has been geographically disadvantaged in the past, but I would argue that this has been because every UK government since 1707 has had London and the home counties as their priority for investment. Wales, N Ireland and the north of England since the demise of ship building and coal, has suffered similar neglect. Don't you consider that an independent Scottish government of whatever hue, unconstricted by the ties of what's devolved and what isn't, focussed on Scotland itself, would function more efficiently to develop the economy? The current Scottish government has just approved the tidal energy project http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24100811  attracting significant global investment to the area.

----------


## ducati

Talking about centralisation, I've recently been in the loop as an event for Scotland was arranged in Perth. The comments from many central belters is it is too far north to go!  ::

----------


## Rheghead

> You have made some good points in your post, in that Scotland has been geographically disadvantaged in the past, but I would argue that this has been because every UK government since 1707 has had London and the home counties as their priority for investment. Wales, N Ireland and the north of England since the demise of ship building and coal, has suffered similar neglect. Don't you consider that an independent Scottish government of whatever hue, unconstricted by the ties of what's devolved and what isn't, focussed on Scotland itself, would function more efficiently to develop the economy? The current Scottish government has just approved the tidal energy project http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24100811  attracting significant global investment to the area.


I did not make the point that Scotland was geographically disadvantaged in the past, I made the point that Scotland is geographically disadvantaged, fullstop.  

I do not subscribe to the notion that the UK government neglected Shipbuilding and coal etc.  Those industries failed because they couldn't adapt their working practices quickly enough to the changing _global_ market. 

I'm sure an independent Scottish government will try its best to invest in communications etc, afterall it is in its best interests to do that, eg upgrade of A9 etc.  But ultimately, commerce is unfettered by mere political restrictions and incentives but is still harnessed by geography and Big business will go where the money is, better roads usually means that more centralisation will take place because you can work from a hub and deliver faster to the outlying customers.  That will mean it is bad for Scotland.  It will mean that businesses are less profitable by going _provincial_.

I applaud what the SNP are trying to do with respect to renewable energy.  Scotland has the best renewable resources in Europe and we just need to build the infrastructure to exploit it.  But transporting electricity doesn't suffer the same drawbacks as other commodities.  It is cheap to transport with little loss over the 1000s of miles of cabling.  It arrives to the customer in an instant.  But you are right, an independent Scotland will benefit from exporting energy but indy is not all about energy as the SNP have learned with respect to oil revenues.

----------


## Humerous Vegetable

You are completely correct that the Scottish economy "is not all about energy". http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...-scotland-jobs My point being that an independent Scottish government, elected by the people of Scotland and working soley *for* the people of Scotland would be best placed to encourage global investment in Scotland. The Irish government appears to be attracting a lot of foreign (their word) investment into their economy in the last few months, as are other independent nations-Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland.....who do not have the throttling ligatures of "devolution" around their throats. 
I don't believe i said that these areas of the UK were neglected by the UK government before the demise of heavy industry, but they have been since, and that is not argueable.

----------


## ducati

> You are completely correct that the Scottish economy "is not all about energy". http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...-scotland-jobs My point being that an independent Scottish government, elected by the people of Scotland and working soley *for* the people of Scotland would be best placed to encourage global investment in Scotland. The Irish government appears to be attracting a lot of foreign (their word) investment into their economy in the last few months, as are other independent nations-Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland.....who do not have the throttling ligatures of "devolution" around their throats. 
> I don't believe i said that these areas of the UK were neglected by the UK government before the demise of heavy industry, but they have been since, and that is not argueable.


What you have to remember is that pretty much all the Scottish manufacturing industry was placed strategically in Scotland by the UK government. When it became obsolete, there was nothing to replace it until the digital and service industries started to fill the void. You can't blame the UK government for it's loss, and I'm sure you didn't thank it for the jobs etc. in the first place.

----------


## Rheghead

> My point being that an independent Scottish government, elected by the people of Scotland and working soley *for* the people of Scotland would be best placed to encourage global investment in Scotland.


A powerful statement and primae facie very true.

However, the current devolved Scottish Government does have a duty to attract investment from all over the world as well as encourage domestic investment.  I cannot think of one single scenario where independence would make any difference to that process.

----------


## ducati

> A powerful statement and primae facie very true.
> 
> However, the current devolved Scottish Government does have a duty to attract investment from all over the world as well as encourage domestic investment.  I cannot think of one single scenario where independence would make any difference to that process.


As I understand it, certain independentists expect to be able to tax business in such a way as to pay for much more in the way of socialist policies than is currently the case. This to my mind would make Scotland very uncompetitive when it comes to attracting new investment and is very likely to drive away existing investment.

----------


## Oddquine

> A powerful statement and primae facie very true.
> 
> However, the current devolved Scottish Government does have a duty to attract investment from all over the world as well as encourage domestic investment.  I cannot think of one single scenario where independence would make any difference to that process.


Maybe having the ability to access fiscal policy to help would be beneficial. As it is, everything spent from our sparse pocket money on attracting inward investment etc..at which they have admittedly done well....is money not available for other things which are just as important..like a faster start to the dualling of the A9 for example.  The duty is a duty to maximise *UK* income...not Scotland's income, as, apart from the input to the local economy with a possible increase in service jobs...all taxes from the new business, personal taxes from the new jobs and taxes from the businesses in the local economy who have benefited from the new business in their area, hurtle down to land in the piggy bank in London..for the *UK Government* to spend as they will.   

The scenario re a duty to attract inward investment and encourage new business starts won't change on Independence....bar the fact that *we* would keep the taxes produced  by our own efforts to spend as *we* see fit....and not just add it to the UK pot to pay for the UK Government strutting the world stage as if they were as important in fact as they are in their own minds.

----------


## ducati

> ....and not just add it to the UK pot to pay for the UK Government strutting the world stage as if they were as important in fact as they are in their own minds.


Maybe if you moderated your pronouncments you wouldn't turn so many people off.

----------


## ducati

Anyone see the big debate on telly? Trust me I'm a politician.  ::

----------


## golach

> Anyone see the big debate on telly? Trust me I'm a politician.


Saw it and it has not made me change my mind from voting NO, in fact made my mind stronger

----------


## ducati

> Saw it and it has not made me change my mind from voting NO, in fact made my mind stronger


It made my mind run out of my ears. The Yes gagies trotting out the same old pronouncements as undesputed facts, then all the No gagies er.. desputing them.

----------


## Humerous Vegetable

> What you have to remember is that pretty much all the Scottish manufacturing industry was placed strategically in Scotland by the UK government. When it became obsolete, there was nothing to replace it until the digital and service industries started to fill the void. You can't blame the UK government for it's loss, and I'm sure you didn't thank it for the jobs etc. in the first place.


Yes, and so it might - the UK government was the *only* source of attracting employment then, and still has an influence over what can set up now. A devovled Scottish government (including the previous devolved governments) have been successful in bringing in new companies and increased job opportunites for the Scottish workforce. How much better would it perform with control over the fiscal and economic agenda?

----------


## ducati

> Yes, and so it might - the UK government was the *only* source of attracting employment then, and still has an influence over what can set up now. A devovled Scottish government (including the previous devolved governments) have been successful in bringing in new companies and increased job opportunites for the Scottish workforce. How much better would it perform with control over the fiscal and economic agenda?


Well he'll have to be good at it because the first thing AS is going to do is throw all the peeps working for and supporting Holy Loch out of work followed closely by (as a result) anyone working on any UK defence contracts.

----------


## orkneycadian

Still no sign of Pirate Lassie coming back to clear up any misconceptions?

----------


## Oddquine

> Still no sign of Pirate Lassie coming back to clear up any misconceptions?


Give it up...if you don't want to debate.....don't damn well post. One liners saying nothing connected to thrust of the OP is trolling..and this is your third go at it.  It is starting to smack of harassment

----------


## equusdriving

> Give it up...if you don't want to debate.....don't damn well post. One liners saying nothing connected to thrust of the OP is trolling..and this is your third go at it.  It is starting to smack of harassment


 Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha you get funnier and funnier  ::  ::  ::

----------


## Humerous Vegetable

> Well he'll have to be good at it because the first thing AS is going to do is throw all the peeps working for and supporting Holy Loch out of work followed closely by (as a result) anyone working on any UK defence contracts.


Is Alex Salmond and the SNP going to be the first elected government after independence then? How do you know? I myself think it will probably be a coalition between Labour, the SNP and the Greens. It doesn't really matter *who* makes the decisions in my opinion, so long as they are basing their policy on what's best for Scotland and the people they serve. Next year's independence vote is *not* for a political party of any colour, it is for the chance of the people of Scotland to vote for the ability to chose our own way forward, without being tied to the UK political agenda.
Most of the current UK defence budget appears to be going overseas anyway.

----------


## weezer 316

> Thats true but whenever I ask this question I never get an answer - why do people think that Scotland will be bankrupt after Independence.  Secrets in Symmetry is fond of this point of view but never ever answers my questions - I think Im probably on ignore.   What are people with the opinion that Scotland will be another Greece or Spain and bankrupt basing that opinion on? What have they read or heard that persuades them that Scotland will just crash completely?  Is there anybody willing to answer this cos I dont get it.....


Scotland wouldn't be bankrupt. Any unionist that tells you we would is as ignorant as the nationalists that say we are  poor (we are loaded) an exploited by westminster.

We would, actually, in 3 of the past 4 years, have had a much lower deficit than the UK, and in 2009/10 would almost have been in the black.

BUT

We would be greece mark 2 under the current plans. The biggest issue Greece has is that its currency in controlled from a foreign land which has bigger fish to fry, and printing money is off the table. No Political of fiscal union but there is a monetary one. Scotland with the sterling would be the same. Its a non issue now, it could be the single biggest issue we ever face if it happened. Infact it would be. Ive mentioned it before to you. £100bn of new cash from the BoE woudl be peanuts to England, if we really needed interest rates raised though it would cripple us, literally.

----------


## sids

> it would cripple us, literally.


Now that is serious.

What would it to to people who are already of limited mobility?

----------


## golach

> Most of the current UK defence budget appears to be going overseas anyway.


Oh is that so, the Daring class destroyers being bult on the Clyda at the moment, 2 of the biggest aircraft carriers being assembled in Rosyth and the Astute class submarines being built in Barrow on Furness, to mention a few,

----------


## Humerous Vegetable

> Oh is that so, the Daring class destroyers being bult on the Clyda at the moment, 2 of the biggest aircraft carriers being assembled in Rosyth and the Astute class submarines being built in Barrow on Furness, to mention a few,


Yes, I think that is so. BAE systems, which has the major part of the current British government's defense budget (around £4 billion) appears to be a subsidiary of US arms suppliers. Armoured personnel vehicles are being supplied by India, the Eurofighter is being built in Germany and paid for by UK taxpayers..... The aircraft carriers at Rosyth might be being assembled there because of their deep water port, but where did all the bits come from? It is quite difficult to discover exactly where the MOD defence budget is going, but it's a fair bet that most of it is going to the US.

----------


## ducati

> Yes, I think that is so. BAE systems, which has the major part of the current British government's defense budget (around £4 billion) appears to be a subsidiary of US arms suppliers. Armoured personnel vehicles are being supplied by India, the Eurofighter is being built in Germany and paid for by UK taxpayers..... The aircraft carriers at Rosyth might be being assembled there because of their deep water port, but where did all the bits come from? It is quite difficult to discover exactly where the MOD defence budget is going, but it's a fair bet that most of it is going to the US.


Regardless of your conspiracy theory, the fact is that fighting ships are never outsourced beyond UK borders. Make of that what you will.

----------


## orkneycadian

> Orkneycadian? Can anyone please tell me on why they believe Scotland will be bankrupt after Independence?


I would love to see the figures to see if we will be or not.  I remain ever hopefull when I see the post van going up the road to the house, that he will be bringing me the "Election Referendum Communication" that I have not received yet.  But every day, when I get back to the house, I am disappointed to find only more bills.  All I hear is that we'll be better off than we were before due to all this oil and gas, even though my fellow Highlanders and Islanders seem to be extremely concerned about the fracking processes we will have to deploy to recover it.

If anyone can point me in the direction of realistic projections for the economy of an independant Scotland that stretch as far forward as realistically practicable (and I mean longer than a couple of years), then I would be pleased to look them over.

----------


## Rheghead

> Yes, I think that is so. BAE systems, which has the major part of the current British government's defense budget (around £4 billion) *appears to be a subsidiary of US arms suppliers*. Armoured personnel vehicles are being supplied by India, the Eurofighter is being built in Germany and paid for by UK taxpayers..... The aircraft carriers at Rosyth might be being assembled there because of their deep water port, but where did all the bits come from? It is quite difficult to discover exactly where the MOD defence budget is going, but it's a fair bet that most of it is going to the US.


BAE Systems is British, the clue is in the name.  The UK Government has golden shares which do not allow it to be controlled by a foreign power.

----------


## golach

> The aircraft carriers at Rosyth might be being assembled there because of their deep water port, but where did all the bits come from? It is quite difficult to discover exactly where the MOD defence budget is going, but it's a fair bet that most of it is going to the US.


The Parts came from the following British ports and companys BAE systemsin Glasgow, Babcock at Appledore, Babcock at Rosyth, A&P in Hebburn, BAE at Portsmouth and Cammell Laird (flight decks) at Birkenhead. All these places are in the UK the last time I looked.

----------


## Humerous Vegetable

> The Parts came from the following British ports and companys BAE systemsin Glasgow, Babcock at Appledore, Babcock at Rosyth, A&P in Hebburn, BAE at Portsmouth and Cammell Laird (flight decks) at Birkenhead. All these places are in the UK the last time I looked.


Okay, thanks for that info. That would be Cammell Laird, now owned by A&P which is now owned by Peel Group, which is owned by the Saudis? I'm glad the work is being done in the UK. My point was that the defence budget is being spent on overseas suppliers. I don't know what percentage, because the MOD is notoriously coy about disclosing facts about their spending.
You know what, I give up posting on here, because the best thing about banging your head against a brick wall is when you stop.

----------


## ducati

> You know what, I give up posting on here, because the best thing about banging your head against a brick wall is when you stop.


Result! SIS will be pleased. bliddy successionists.

----------


## Humerous Vegetable

Except for this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...colours-save-3 
I'm sure that poster will be pleased, and all the others who make thousands of posts in a few years and appear to say absolutely nothing of interest at all. Much like your good self.

----------


## orkneycadian

I thought you had given up posting in this thread?   :Wink:

----------


## ducati

> Except for this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...colours-save-3 
> I'm sure that poster will be pleased, and all the others who make thousands of posts in a few years and appear to say absolutely nothing of interest at all. Much like your good self.


Who said that?  ::

----------


## squidge

The Scottish Government has produced a paper which deals with issues around pensions and explains both how pensions will work after independence and also how they will plan for the future.  
It also looks at the affordability of the pensions and explains the demographics concerned with pensions.  

Its not a quick read but I am sure that if Pensions are what you are most concerned about then you will be glad to have some of this detail.  

You can read it here http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0043/00434502.pdf

----------


## Better Out Than In

Population Nigeria - 170m, oil rich nation - not doing so good.  You can't just cherry pick information that fits your argument unless you are a politician

----------


## weezer 316

Horrible analogy^^^^

----------


## Oddquine

> Population Nigeria - 170m, oil rich nation - not doing so good.  You can't just cherry pick information that fits your argument unless you are a politician


But then you do kinda have to have a nation which isn't going to shoot everybody who doesn't think the way they do....and a set of politicians who do not think that all the money coming into the country is theirs to buy houses, planes etc.  Can you see Scotland being any worse than the UK re noses in troughs......or they may even be better than the UK millionaires who represent us (yeah, right the millionaires in Government represent us) Did you know that the current NHS privatisation mooted for England will, directly or indirectly benefit 147 peers and 73 MPs? 

Scotland, having seen they way that the UK Government operates does, at  least, have the option, with a written Constitution to stop our MPs feathering their nests to the detriment of the rest of us.

I do have to shake my head when the Westminster Government bang on about what we have achieved as a Union over the years as they proceed to tear apart by far *the* most important part of that achievement...... as they demolish the welfare state to get money to fight illegal wars, maintain a nuclear weapon , bail out the banks....and of course reduce the taxes on the rich and not plug the ability to let them avoid tax. 

Scotland, an oil rich nation...not doing so good... is it....._really_?  And if you think it is, pray explain why you think that.

----------


## orkneycadian

> Scotland, an oil rich nation...not doing so good... is it....._really_?  And if you think it is, pray explain why you think that.


More accurately, an ex oil rich nation, who, if successful in attaining independence, wish to remain members of the EU who will tell us to further reduce our carbon emissions.

We were oil rich in the 70's and 80's when the stuff literally squirted out of the ground, and no-one gave 2 hoots about CO2.  This is now the "Teenies", the stuff is getting hard to find, and even harder to produce and consume.

----------


## squidge

The oil is still there and Even at its lowest estimates, the revenue from oil will increase Scotland's wealth. Not with the levels of income we saw in the 70s or 80 s but it is still provides significant income and will do for a good number of years yet. Remember Scotland is also working hard to develop new technologies, only this month the first wave power development received permission. Scotland is at the leading edge of some of these new technologies and projects. That will not stop the day after independence just like the oil wont run out the day after independence.

----------


## ducati

> The oil is still there and Even at its lowest estimates, the revenue from oil will increase Scotland's wealth. Not with the levels of income we saw in the 70s or 80 s but it is still provides significant income and will do for a good number of years yet. Remember Scotland is also working hard to develop new technologies, only this month the first wave power development received permission. Scotland is at the leading edge of some of these new technologies and projects. That will not stop the day after independence just like the oil wont run out the day after independence.


Maybe I missed it. Who says Scotland will get the oil revenue? I would have thought that during these hypothetical negotiations you keep going on about, that the oil revenue will be apportioned fairly. So that would be about 10-1 in favour of the balance of the UK wouldn't it?

----------


## porshiepoo

For those of you that want independence you would have been certain to get it had the entire UK been given the chance to vote and not just Scotland. The English people are sick to death of getting blamed for everything that has gone wrong, does go wrong or will go wrong with Scotland and a vast majority of the population would be glad to give you the freedom you so adamantly declare you want.
You see whereas some Scots seem to dislike the English because of historical grievances, for being better footballers or for failing to accurately describe the nationality of an athlete (all sound grievances I'm sure  :: ) the English dislike not the Scots but the fact that Scotland currently gets a better deal on matters that actually effect people today- not 300 years ago- such as free education, free prescriptions, free parking, subsidies etc etc, all of which we stand a good chance of losing through independence.
Let the entire nation vote and Scotland will get its independence.

----------


## Oddquine

> For those of you that want independence you would have been certain to get it had the entire UK been given the chance to vote and not just Scotland. The English people are sick to death of getting blamed for everything that has gone wrong, does go wrong or will go wrong with Scotland and a vast majority of the population would be glad to give you the freedom you so adamantly declare you want.
> You see whereas some Scots seem to dislike the English because of historical grievances, for being better footballers or for failing to accurately describe the nationality of an athlete (all sound grievances I'm sure ) the English dislike not the Scots but the fact that Scotland currently gets a better deal on matters that actually effect people today- not 300 years ago- such as free education, free prescriptions, free parking, subsidies etc etc, all of which we stand a good chance of losing through independence.
> Let the entire nation vote and Scotland will get its independence.


Have to say the chip on your shoulder appears to be as big as the one you assume is on ours.  Which part of the way Scotland has been for the 292 years before devolution has *not* been down to successive UK Governments since 1707, pray tell?  How much inroad can any Scottish Government, even if they wanted, which those of a Unionist persuasion tended not to want, make into rectifying 292 years of neglect for the majority because those who counted then and had influence were in London bigging it up and not caring? 

Do you really think that an extremely limited devolution, and the not much less limited version on offer after 2014 if we vote No, is going to improve the outcomes in Scotland.....and reduce the rancour in England when we set policies they'd like but won't get from any UK Government? We don't get a_ "better deal"_...we just have a Government now which believes that _the rest of the UK gets a crap deal_ which doesn't please the majority of Scots (and possibly a lot of the rest of the UK)...and we use the pocket money, from our *own* taxes, btw, not those of the rest of the UK, to get our lives nearer to what we want........it is hardly our fault that England is stuck, as we all are in the UK, with the Government _they_ vote for...is it? We are just lucky that we don't have to sit back and accept it.  

Why would you think we would lose all our "perks of devolution" come independence, out of interest?  Seems to me they are reducing annually now  anyway with the effect on the Barnett formula of the way the UK Government delineates "English Only" expenditure as "applicable UK wide".......and will be cut regularly anyway as part of the cuts the UK Parliament has flagged up over the board whichever Government is in power in 2015.....and, if you are to go by the rhetoric of some English MPs, with a no vote in the referendum, cut massively more......if not removed completely.

Bear in mind, Scotland, after voting no in 1979, because of the 40% rule, had larger cuts, by a _big_ amount, in the Barnett Formula (as punishment for really voting yes?), than either Wales or NI.....so what makes you think that come a NO vote, (given the past example).....we will be able to continue _ free education, free prescriptions, free parking, subsidies etc _ then..far less after independence?

----------


## equusdriving

> so what makes you think that come a NO vote, (given the past example).....we will be able to continue _ free education, free prescriptions, free parking, subsidies etc _ then..far less after independence?


well the moral there is, be grateful for what you already have, and don't take it for granted!

----------


## squidge

Actually what I find about "english" people in England is that rather than being sick to death of anything they are interested and curious. They also understand that Scotland spends more on public services because those public services are a priority of the Scottish Parliament in a way that they are not a priority of the westminster parliament. 

Ducati the oil will form part of the negotiations that take place if there is a YES vote. There are a couple of options, Scotland can claim its share of assets and take its share of the debt too. Alternatively Scotland could walk away with none of the assets but in this case it would take none of the debt too. This happens if Scotland is a "new" state and both options are available within international law.  The oil is however slightly different in that the laws surrounding maritime boundaries are well established as the way to decide which bit of the sea belongs to a new country through the UN convention on Laws of the Sea ( i think thats its proper name). Despite Scotland being part of the UK it already has defined maritime boundaries because of the difference in Scots Law. All these things will be looked at as part of the negotiations and these things will decide how much oil is in Scottish Waters rather than the population share that you seem to suggest.

----------


## squidge

> well the moral there is, be grateful for what you already have, and don't take it for granted!


Equus you are absolutely right we should be grateful. 

The Scottish Government has prioritised out public services in a way that Westminster hasnt. Whilst there have had to be cuts and reorganisations because of cuts in funding we have still been able to spend more on things that help and support people rather than profit making privatisation schemes. 

Your warning not to take things for granted is also important. This is because the cuts which are imposed on the rest of the UK affect the amount of money which Scotland has to fund its vital services. So far the NHS has been protected from the rampant privatisation happening elsewhere but this drive to cut spending is reducing the money allocated for Scotland's NHS. The only way to prevent the privatisation of Scotland's NHS is to vote YES because then the money raised in Scotland will be spent on Scottish Priorities. 

So you are absolutely right Equus. Do not take these things for granted. Free prescriptions, Free tuition fees, Free personal care, the removal of the bedroom tax, the development of a different welfare system, a new system of taxation, a publicly funded NHS all these things can only be retained and are only possible if Scotland votes YES for independence.

----------


## equusdriving

> . Free prescriptions, Free tuition fees, Free personal care, the removal of the bedroom tax, the development of a different welfare system, a new system of taxation, a publicly funded NHS all these things can only be retained and are only possible if Scotland votes YES for independence.


what completely blinkered, naive, and unfounded utter rubbish at best or blatant  lies?  ::

----------


## squidge

> what completely blinkered, naive, and unfounded utter rubbish at best or blatant  lies?


Lol... My opinion thats all. However I would be interested to know how you can say the same thing about all these issues if we remain within the Union. Free prescriptions, Free tuition fees, Free personal care, the removal of the bedroom tax, the development of a different welfare system, a new system of taxation, a publicly funded NHS - can you say that these will be retained or even possible if we remain in the Union? I dont think you can. 

However, I am prepared to be proved wrong Equus so on ya go hon...

----------


## equusdriving

> Lol... My opinion thats all


 Shame that its facts (or lack of) that change peoples minds not opinions


> However I would be interested to know how you can say the same thing about all these issues if we remain within the Union.


Exactly! I don't know so I haven't said!  you don't know but you have said! and I don't think your fears have much reason, as we are in the Union  and have all these benefits now, but you are somehow using that fact to  back Independence  ::

----------


## squidge

Ok Equus here are some FACTS for you.

The only party to introduce and maintain the universal benefits is the SNP. The  prescriptions charges,  tuition fees, and personal care will disappear as soon as the SNP cease to form a government and the labour party under the instructions of Westminster repeal them. Unless they are protected by a constitution. The ONLY way there will be a constitution is in an Independent Scotland.

 The Bedroom Tax will only be repealed if we get an Independent Scotland or a Labour Government and if you think independence is unlikely then a Labour Government is just as unlikely. We cannot abolish the Bedroom Tax within Scotland as it is. 

Fact- there are NO plans for a different welfare system based on support rather than punishment in the UK. 
Fact- there are NO plans for a new system of taxation
Fact- the money coming to Scotland for the NHS is reducing because of the cuts in public spending on the NHS in the rest of the UK. How long before we cant afford to make up the difference? 

If you add to these facts the information that you can find all over the press about calls by MPs to slash the money coming into Scotland and to abolish the Barnett Formula and if you also understand that the Scottish Parliament itself could be disbanded by Westminster (Although I dont believe that will happen but some people do) then it is perfectly reasonable to believe that, as I said, these things can only be retained or even be possible with a YES vote. 

These things may not matter to you, you may have other priorities and that is ok but these are some of mine. If you can show me that there is even a better chance or maybe just an even chance, that we will retain these things or have the chance to change the  welfare or tax systems then I would be glad to change what I have said. Until then my opinion stands.

----------


## equusdriving

> The only party to introduce and maintain the universal benefits is the SNP. The  prescriptions charges,  tuition fees, and personal care will disappear as soon as the SNP cease to form a government


 so  what happens after Independence and a different party is voted in ??



> We cannot abolish the Bedroom Tax within Scotland as it is.


 Cant say I will lose any sleep over that



> Fact- there are NO plans for a different welfare system based on support rather than punishment in the UK. 
> Fact- there are NO plans for a new system of taxation
> Fact- the money coming to Scotland for the NHS is reducing because of the cuts in public spending on the NHS in the rest of the UK. How long before we cant afford to make up the difference?


FACT- No plans to, doesn't mean it wont/cant happen



> These things may not matter to you, you may have other priorities and that is ok


 Oh I am pleased about that  :: 



> Until then my opinion stands.


good for you :Grin:

----------


## squidge

> so  what happens after Independence and a different party is voted in ?? D


As I said there is a commitment to draw up a written constitution after the YES vote. Issues like housing and The right to free education are likely to be included in the constitution which means they will be fundamental rights in an independent Scotland. Without a YES vote there will be no constitution and no doubt that these important supports will be removed. 


> Cant say I will lose any sleep over thatD


 You are alright then Equus? Not having to decide between paying the tax or buying food or electric? I am glad. 


> FACT- No plans to, doesn't mean it wont/cant happen D


 FACT- There is no westminster party which is ideologically committed to fundamentally changing the welfare system or the tax system. There is NO opportunity for changes within Westminster. You arent a fool Equus - you must know that. So Ill say it again... The only way to ensure we retain these public spending priorities, protect the NHS and have the opportunity to change the tax and welfare system is to vote YES in the referendum.

----------


## equusdriving

> are likely to be included


 oh well that's reassuring then  ::  


> no doubt that these important supports will be removed


I take it that's another "your opinion" slipped in like a fact  


> You are alright then Equus?


 yes very good thanks :Grin:  


> There is NO opportunity for changes within Westminster


 and another one.


> You arent a fool Equus


 oh well you must be right then


> The only way to ensure we retain these public spending priorities, protect the NHS and have the opportunity to change the tax and welfare system is to vote YES in the referendum.


 and one more to end on

I cant understand how, if Independence is so good, why the few are having to convince the many of it.............but then again I bet your lot would have seen the emperors new clothes too Squidge ::

----------


## squidge

> I cant understand how, if Independence is so good, why the few are having to convince the many of it.............but then again I bet your lot would have seen the emperors new clothes too Squidge


Lol Equus I am not trying to convince anyone. I simply post my opinions on threads which interest me. At least it gives an alternative to the endlessly negative, often rude, occasionally patronising and rarely positive stuff posted here in support of a NO vote. Not forgetting the discreditted Scotland is too poor, too wee and too stupid to cope with independence argument which is rolled out with unfailing regularity on this board. I dont care which way people vote but I do care that they get to hear different opinions or points of view.

----------


## equusdriving

> I am not trying to convince anyone


and that statement certainly isn't convincing anyone! 


> I simply post my opinions


yes and try to pass them off as facts! 


> At least it gives an alternative to the endlessly negative, often rude, occasionally patronising and rarely positive stuff posted here in support of a NO vote.


 hold on, its your lot that starts the posts, and then throw your rattles when holes are pointed out in your facts/opinions (delete which one is appropriate)  


> Not forgetting the discreditted Scotland is too poor, too wee and too stupid to cope with independence argument which is rolled out with unfailing regularity on this board


that's funny because your lot are always bringing this up, but  I cant remember the last time I have seen this mentioned by a unionist. 


> I dont care which way people vote but I do care that they get to hear different opinions or points of view.


No you mean you care, that they don't believe YOUR point of view

----------


## squidge

> and that statement certainly isn't convincing anyone! yes and try to pass them off as facts!  hold on, its your lot that starts the posts, and then throw your rattles when holes are pointed out in your facts/opinions (delete which one is appropriate)  that's funny because your lot are always bringing this up, but  I cant remember the last time I have seen this mentioned by a unionist. No you mean you care, that they don't believe YOUR point of view


 I never start threads on independence. Varieties of the too small too weak and too stupid have been posted in this last week or so. Maybe you dont bother to read anything but your own mutterings. Equus I truly dont care which way you or anyone else votes. Its up to them. Surely you too must agree its good to hear alternative opinons. Now this conversation has moved away from the issues to me responding to your nit picking and sniping. I cant be bothered so I'll step out here and leave you to it. I be back if there are issues to respond to Equus. In the meantime, have a nice day  :Smile:

----------


## ducati

I was at a live gig in Snecky last night and the stage gaggie asked the question "Inverness, independence yes or no?" A resounding no. So we are still on track.

----------


## equusdriving

> I never start threads on independence.


I said "your lot"


> Varieties of the too small too weak and too stupid have been posted in this last week or so.


 please show where those words have been used or is it yet another case of reading what suits you into it?


> Maybe you dont bother to read anything but your own mutterings


 no, but I don't suffer fools gladly either. 


> Equus I truly dont care which way you or anyone else votes. Its up to them.


 just as well because with your reasoning I don't see you convincing anyone 


> Surely you too must agree its good to hear alternative opinons.


yes if they are credible 


> Now this conversation has moved away from the issues to me responding to your nit picking and sniping.


 I forgot you don't like substantiating your claims


> I be back if there are issues to respond to Equus.


 when you have a plausible answer to them I hope 


> In the meantime, have a nice day


missing you already

----------


## squidge

Yesterday there was a paper released by HMRC.  This paper http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/statistics/re...isagg-info.pdf is called "A disaggregation of HMRC tax receipts between England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland" a real snappy title I'm sure you will agree.

What it does is it seperates out the tax receipts for each part of the UK and shows you this in a table and a graph form.  What the tables show is that in each of the last 13 years Scotland has contributed more than its population share of taxes - so Scotland has 8.4% of the population and has contributed up to 10.2% of the total tax take of the UK in 2008/9 and 8.6% in 2001. The last time that Scotland contributed less than its population share was 1999/2000 when it contributed 8.3% What this means is that since devolution Scotland has contributed £42.5 billion over and above its populations share to the income of the UK.  

There are also a couple of graphs which show the increases over time with and without the income from oil.  Without oil the tax receipts from Scotland increased more rapidly than England and Wales and with the income from oil the tax receipts from Scotland grew more rapidly than England Wales and Northern Ireland although they did show more volatility.  

This report states that it is an experimental report and I havent time just now to follow the links to drill down into the figures but it clearly shows that Scotland is not subsidiesed by the rest of the UK and stands tall on its own two feet.  It is an HMRC report and not a Scottish Government Report and so cant is objective and interesting.  

There is no suggestion that this will change after Independence from any credible source and so it is a jolly good place to be I think. Worth a look whichever side of the debate you sit on.

----------


## golach

> Yesterday there was a paper released by HMRC.  This paper http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/statistics/re...isagg-info.pdf is called "A disaggregation of HMRC tax receipts between England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland" a real snappy title I'm sure you will agree..


In my opinion, since the IR took over the HMC&E there have been so many inaccurate statements coming out of that department, if they told me tomorrow was going to be Friday I would not believe them.

----------


## squidge

> In my opinion, since the IR took over the HMC&E there have been so many inaccurate statements coming out of that department, if they told me tomorrow was going to be Friday I would not believe them.



hahahahahaha Golach is there ANYONE or ANYTHING you DO beleive?

----------


## Oddquine

> hahahahahaha Golach is there ANYONE or ANYTHING you DO beleive?


There is.....every media hack who miscalls  Alex Salmond and the SNP. Every right wing site like Britain First which produces quotes he can use to miscall Alex Salmond and the SNP......and every word emanating from the UK Government and their employees.....but _only_ those which confirm his POV. 

I do hope that there aren't many more like golach, who appears to be going to vote in this important referendum based on the personalities of the current temporary leaders on either side. That is not voting for Scotland *or* the Union...that is voting for or against Alex Salmond/SNP and David Cameron/Tories...and we have regular elections which enable us to do that..but perhaps the difference between an election for a Government and a referendum on independence has passed them by.

----------


## ducati

I'm quite happy to accept the report at face value. It makes no difference to me. It is not percentages that matter, it is actual numbers of £s available.

----------


## ducati

> There is.....every media hack who miscalls  Alex Salmond and the SNP. Every right wing site like Britain First which produces quotes he can use to miscall Alex Salmond and the SNP......and every word emanating from the UK Government and their employees.....but _only_ those which confirm his POV. 
> 
> I do hope that there aren't many more like golach, who appears to be going to vote in this important referendum based on the personalities of the current temporary leaders on either side. That is not voting for Scotland *or* the Union...that is voting for or against Alex Salmond/SNP and David Cameron/Tories...and we have regular elections which enable us to do that..but perhaps the difference between an election for a Government and a referendum on independence has passed them by.


Interesting considering you are usually so vitriollic about the current and past UK governments.

----------


## golach

> hahahahahaha Golach is there ANYONE or ANYTHING you DO beleive?


I believe in my own Judgement and common sense Squidge.

Oddthing I am not voting for any politician I am voting for the Union, no matter who is currently at the helm. I do not contribute to or read the Britain First website, but on your recommendation, I will now have a look.

----------


## equusdriving

> hahahahahaha Golach is there ANYONE or ANYTHING you DO beleive?


I bet salesmen rub their hands together when they see you coming,salesman  "morning madam would you like to part exchange your car for this nice shiny one"   Squidge " is it more economical" salesman "well it could well be"  Squidge "is it cheaper to tax" salesman "well it could well be" Squidge "is it cheaper to insure" salesman "well it could well be" Squidge "is it cheaper to maintain" salesman "well it could well be" Squidge " has it got service history" salesman "maybe" Squidge "how much is it" salesman "I will let you know after we have done the deal" Squidge "wow that sounds perfect I will take it"

----------


## squidge

> I believe in my own Judgement and common sense Squidge.
> 
> Oddthing I am not voting for any politician I am voting for the Union, no matter who is currently at the helm. I do not contribute to or read the Britain First website, but on your recommendation, I will now have a look.


Britain First isnt my recommendation.Golach.  I dont suggest that ANYONE grubs around in some of the unionist pages unless they have a strong stomach for EDL, SDL. National Front ( yes they still exist - particularly in the Anerdeen area for some reason) anti islam, anti catholic rhetoric. They can be really really unpleasant. Dont go there.

----------


## squidge

> I bet salesmen rub their hands together when they see you coming,salesman  "morning madam would you like to part exchange your car for this nice shiny one"   Squidge " is it more economical" salesman "well it could well be"  Squidge "is it cheaper to tax" salesman "well it could well be" Squidge "is it cheaper to insure" salesman "well it could well be" Squidge "is it cheaper to maintain" salesman "well it could well be" Squidge " has it got service history" salesman "maybe" Squidge "how much is it" salesman "I will let you know after we have done the deal" Squidge "wow that sounds perfect I will take it"


More personal insults Equus - do you actually have anything of any value to say?

----------


## golach

> Britain First isnt my recommendation.Golach.  I dont suggest that ANYONE grubs around in some of the unionist pages unless they have a strong stomach for EDL, SDL. National Front ( yes they still exist - particularly in the Anerdeen area for some reason) anti islam, anti catholic rhetoric. They can be really really unpleasant. Dont go there.


Oddthing did Squidge, not you

----------


## squidge

> Oddthing did Squidge, not you


Then she assumes you have a strong tummy Golach.  Occasionally I follow a link and end up somewhere like these pages - they make me feel like i need a shower.

----------


## Rheghead

> More personal insults Equus - do you actually have anything of any value to say?


I didn't see any insults.

He was just alluding to the say Yes campaign has an answer for anything, they tell you what you want to hear and that perhaps you are their most evangelical angel for all seasons.

----------


## squidge

Lol rheghead - maybe - I think thats a bit disingenuous though - It was designed to be insulting. And besides you think its ok to suggest I am just a silly lovestruck wifie without an opinion to call her own so forgive me if I dont think you're opinion on whether something is insulting is worth much.  Maybe I should just be glad Equus didnt call me a liar - thats the usual route taken.  

I am vocal in my support for Independence Rheghead cos I beleive its the right way to go and if that makes me an angel then so be it.

----------


## Oddquine

> Then she assumes you have a strong tummy Golach.  Occasionally I follow a link and end up somewhere like these pages - they make me feel like i need a shower.


Odd_quine_ did because golach, _himself_, linked to that site when asserting that the SNP supported the IRA as proof of his assertion..so either he reads it, or he happened to input IRA and SNP or words to that effect into Google just by happenstance! See posts #74 and #76 in the  _Your reasons for voting No in the Independence referendum_ thread.

----------


## equusdriving

> More personal insults Equus - do you actually have anything of any value to say?


 makes me wonder how you cope in real life if you think that is personal insults ::  it is no worse than  comments you make, so dry your sensitive little eyes and trot on ::

----------


## equusdriving

> Maybe I should just be glad Equus didnt call me a liar - thats the usual route taken.


indeed when you lie I call you a liar just as you have called me and others before, the difference is you are also HYPOCRITE!

----------


## squidge

Lol equus anything else honey? 

 You assume Im upset by your personal comments. I am not. I simply remarked on the fact that you threw insults around but said nothing of any value. Just as you throw your insults around but do not ever back them up with anything or give any real reasons for the accusations you make.  I try hard never to call anyone names or personally insult them. I might not always succeed but i do try to only attack the post and never the poster.

 So crack on with your insults... Maybe you would like to make a quick list and we can get them out of the way all at once and move on. Perhaps a poll? Or a sticky thread so you can keep them all in one place and not forget which particular insult you are up to. You could alphabetise it or use a different one for each day of the week.

Crack on Equus. I'll just get on with grown up stuff and leave you to your musings on the "many failings of Squidge.

----------


## equusdriving

> Lol equus anything else honey? 
> 
>  You assume Im upset by your personal comments. I am not. I simply remarked on the fact that you threw insults around but said nothing of any value. Just as you throw your insults around but do not ever back them up with anything or give any real reasons for the accusations you make.  I try hard never to call anyone names or personally insult them. I might not always succeed but i do try to only attack the post and never the poster.
> 
>  So crack on with your insults... Maybe you would like to make a quick list and we can get them out of the way all at once and move on. Perhaps a poll? Or a sticky thread so you can keep them all in one place and not forget which particular insult you are up to. You could alphabetise it or use a different one for each day of the week.
> 
> Crack on Equus. I'll just get on with grown up stuff and leave you to your musings on the "many failings of Squidge.


So let me get this right, you are whining because I made a post, you criticized  it and I responded, wow if that's being grown up, I am glad I didn't bother

----------


## squidge

And again .... Nothing said.......Do you actually have anything to say about the report i posted?

----------


## equusdriving

> And again .... Nothing said.......Do you actually have anything to say about the report i posted?


 no I couldn't be bothered to read it, because like you I am only interested in my own opinion ::

----------


## PantsMAN

Just a quicky as I haven't read the previous 300+ posts.

Interesting view from the Finnish contingent.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/3146...7743209316543/

----------


## squidge

> no I couldn't be bothered to read it, because like you I am only interested in my own opinion


I am interested in your opinion too Equus its just a shame you dont have one.

----------


## equusdriving

> I am interested in your opinion too Equus its just a shame you dont have one.


Oh really, then why do you waste so much time questioning it and trying to change it then

----------


## Oddquine

> Lol equus anything else honey? 
> 
>  You assume Im upset by your personal comments. I am not. I simply remarked on the fact that you threw insults around but said nothing of any value. Just as you throw your insults around but do not ever back them up with anything or give any real reasons for the accusations you make.  I try hard never to call anyone names or personally insult them. I might not always succeed but i do try to only attack the post and never the poster.
> 
>  So crack on with your insults... Maybe you would like to make a quick list and we can get them out of the way all at once and move on. Perhaps a poll? Or a sticky thread so you can keep them all in one place and not forget which particular insult you are up to. You could alphabetise it or use a different one for each day of the week.
> 
> Crack on Equus. I'll just get on with grown up stuff and leave you to your musings on the "many failings of Squidge.



Come on, squidge....how many pro-unionists on here do anything much other than produce insulting, pretty much trolling one-liners with no content? Equus is not the only culprit..but certainly the worst one.  Pretty much given up on here bar the Genealogy section, because you can't have a factual debate/discussion....which is why I no longer do  nice and polite all the time.  You know something..there is much better debate on this subject on a Football Forum I frequent ....but then *it* kicks the trolls into touch.

----------


## equusdriving

> Come on, squidge....how many pro-unionists on here do anything much other than produce insulting, pretty much trolling one-liners with no content? Equus is not the only culprit..but certainly the worst one


Thank you I am honored. but I think you are doing pirattelassie a great injustice oh yeah but she's one of your lot


> because you can't have a factual debate/discussion


hahahaha lolololo....


> which is why I no longer do  nice and polite all the time.


oh yeah its only pro-unionist who have to do nice and polite isn't it  


> You know something..there is much better debate on this subject on a Football Forum I frequent ....but then *it* kicks the trolls into touch.


bye then................missing you already

----------


## equusdriving

> Oil rich Norway. Population 4.9 million,independent and prosperous.
> Oil rich Scotland. Population 5.2 million, too wee, too poor, too stupid.
> Think Independence, and please no one reply with so we are, or some other bitchy remark. Show your maturity.


how about this for starters?
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/433...+Showbiz+Feed)
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/alis...6pLid%3D213251

----------


## ducati

> Just a quicky as I haven't read the previous 300+ posts.
> 
> Interesting view from the Finnish contingent.
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/3146...7743209316543/


Cripes there are some serious nutters on there. Just hope they get the help they will need after the NO vote.

Here is a slightly more positive facebook group: 

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Vote-...herStrathclyde

----------


## Oddquine

> Thank you I am honored. but I think you are doing pirattelassie a great injustice oh yeah but she's one of your lothahahaha lolololo....oh yeah its only pro-unionist who have to do nice and polite isn't it  bye then................missing you already


Piratelassie tries to get a debate going on the most important decision for our country in 305 years...as do most of us who post re the Independence issue and the possibilities of it...and I applaud her for that. Trolling is posting eternally often in a multitude of consecutive posts and saying nothing to help any discussion, but making comments intended to flame.....something at which you are an expert....and something which piratelassie does not do.  You would fit well with the commentators on Daily Mail Independence articles, which appear to attract completely  irrational Unionists.

After all, unless you are completely brain dead, you _must_  know the possibilities offered by the UK Government for the future are no less pie in the sky, if that is how you want to consider the papers by the Scottish Government.  The Tories for example are saying they will get us back into surplus by 2020......when they are still *adding* in 2013, annually, with monotonous regularity, to the debt they said they would have reduced by 2015, but won't. Reducing long-term debt is *not* reducing debt if you use a credit card to do that........as any ordinary fairly intelligent punter knows....heck...ask me!  

Given the debt has _not_ reduced, but has in fact _increased_...from about £780 billion when they took over to about a £trillion plus today ,...and in the process of _failing_ to reduce the debt, the Coalition  are trashing, and the Tories are promising to _continue_ to trash, everybody on benefits, in the forlorn hope they will catch the relatively few chancers (who are much more intelligent than our Government and can work the crap systems they have set up), and don't really, tbh, cost us _that_ much in the great scheme of things compared to th  Big Business perks,...like  tax avoidance schemes etc......but then the unemployed aren't going to be in a position to give MPs lucrative directorsihps once they get dunted from their seats. 

I found it interesting that, given the gradual privatistion of the NHS, which is ongoing in England and may well be extended to Scotland, if many in Westminster have their way re "harmonising " of  services in the UK (and I'm not sure if that will only apply only to the NHS....time and a No vote will tell) to find that..that 147 peers and 73 MPs who voted on NHS reconstruction have direct connections as shareholders, or have parents/parents-in-law,family who are shareholders, in most of the companies who now provide drugs, hospital services etc to the NHS under contract. Voting to ensure their income you think?

Add to the targeting of those on benefits..the targeting of everybody in Public Service...re salaries and pensions.....and job losses. ..which, of course _adds_ to the numbers of the undeserving unemployed...and thus to welfare spending.  You care to tell me which sector of society is going to be targeted from 2015 to 2020, *bar* those on benefits or working to try to make our Governments systems work for us  within the limitations of what our MPs impose...because they know those on benefits and public employees are the easy options who won't trash the MPs' employment possibilities when they are not re-elected.  

How much chance, on past performance over years, by *any* UK Government there has ever been that  _their_ pie in the sky projections will be accomplished....and what it will another five years in the UK under whichever Government, neither of which has appeared open to rolling-back the damaging policies of their predecessors since the reign of Thatcher?

But many of you who like the status quo, for whatever reason,don't want debate...you just want a chance to sneer and denigrate all your countrymen and neighbours.......and the Government *they* elected in Scotland in favour of support for a Government which *we* did not elect in Westminster...although you may have voted for it.

I don't expect pro-Unionists to be any more polite than I am.......but I *do* expect them to offer some cogent reasons for supporting the status quo if they are going to take part in a forum discussion.........otherwise, why bother to post at all if they have nothing to offer to sway the undecided voter in their direction but their own irrationality? We saw how that worked with the Labour negativity campaign...when the SNP got the majority the system had been set up to deny them.

Leaving Caithness at the end of the month....but you won't miss me....because I'll still be looking in........and from time to time posting....as I will on the Football forum to which I alluded. That's the beauty of the Internet...you can argue with people all over the world!  ::

----------


## equusdriving

> Piratelassie tries to get a debate going on the most important decision for our country in 305 years...as do most of us who post re the Independence issue and the possibilities of it...and I applaud her for that. Trolling is posting eternally often in a multitude of consecutive posts and saying nothing to help any discussion, but making comments intended to flame.....something at which you are an expert....and something which piratelassie does not do.  You would fit well with the commentators on Daily Mail Independence articles, which appear to attract completely  irrational Unionists.
> 
> After all, unless you are completely brain dead, you _must_  know the possibilities offered by the UK Government for the future are no less pie in the sky, if that is how you want to consider the papers by the Scottish Government.  The Tories for example are saying they will get us back into surplus by 2020......when they are still *adding* in 2013, annually, with monotonous regularity, to the debt they said they would have reduced by 2015, but won't. Reducing long-term debt is *not* reducing debt if you use a credit card to do that........as any ordinary fairly intelligent punter knows....heck...ask me!  
> 
> Given the debt has _not_ reduced, but has in fact _increased_...from about £780 billion when they took over to about a £trillion plus today ,...and in the process of _failing_ to reduce the debt, the Coalition  are trashing, and the Tories are promising to _continue_ to trash, everybody on benefits, in the forlorn hope they will catch the relatively few chancers (who are much more intelligent than our Government and can work the crap systems they have set up), and don't really, tbh, cost us _that_ much in the great scheme of things compared to th  Big Business perks,...like  tax avoidance schemes etc......but then the unemployed aren't going to be in a position to give MPs lucrative directorsihps once they get dunted from their seats. 
> 
> I found it interesting that, given the gradual privatistion of the NHS, which is ongoing in England and may well be extended to Scotland, if many in Westminster have their way re "harmonising " of  services in the UK (and I'm not sure if that will only apply only to the NHS....time and a No vote will tell) to find that..that 147 peers and 73 MPs who voted on NHS reconstruction have direct connections as shareholders, or have parents/parents-in-law,family who are shareholders, in most of the companies who now provide drugs, hospital services etc to the NHS under contract. Voting to ensure their income you think?
> 
> Add to the targeting of those on benefits..the targeting of everybody in Public Service...re salaries and pensions.....and job losses. ..which, of course _adds_ to the numbers of the undeserving unemployed...and thus to welfare spending.  You care to tell me which sector of society is going to be targeted from 2015 to 2020, *bar* those on benefits or working to try to make our Governments systems work for us  within the limitations of what our MPs impose...because they know those on benefits and public employees are the easy options who won't trash the MPs' employment possibilities when they are not re-elected.  
> ...


I must apologise, because although I wish I could be bothered to read  through your long and drawn out post, I started to try, but after reading the initial lies and rubbish I lost what little interest I had and gave up

----------


## Oddquine

> I must apologise, because although I wish I could be bothered to read  through your long and drawn out post, I started to try, but after reading the initial lies and rubbish I lost what little interest I had and gave up


And that illustrates that you are a troll with the attention span of a gnat and the brain capacity of an amoeba........as many of us have always thought!

----------


## golach

> And that illustrates that you are a troll with the attention span of a gnat and the brain capacity of an amoeba........as many of us have always thought!


In my opinion your the troll here

----------


## ducati

You get a really snippy page if you vote NO on the YES Scotland website  ::

----------


## secrets in symmetry

> You get a really snippy page if you vote NO on the YES Scotland website


I wouldn't say it was snippy. I would say it's a downright lie - which is exactly what I would expect from secessionists.

The whole website is full of even worse lies.

----------


## ducati

> I wouldn't say it was snippy. I would say it's a downright lie - which is exactly what I would expect from secessionists.
> 
> The whole website is full of even worse lies.


They even registered me on a forum or facebook group or something without me asking. Presumably they do this to all visitors to boost their quoted support numbers? The email I got to confirm this was from someone with the most proposterous made up Scottish name I've ever seen; Friseal MacFhearghais

----------


## equusdriving

> And that illustrates that you are a troll with the attention span of a gnat and the brain capacity of an amoeba........as many of us have always thought!


mmm  and I can still see that Independence is a mistake, don't say a lot for the mentality of your lot does it

----------


## orkneycadian

> Piratelassie tries to get a debate going on the most important decision for our country in 305 years...as do most of us who post re the Independence issue and the possibilities of it...and I applaud her for that. Trolling is posting eternally often in a multitude of consecutive posts and saying nothing to help any discussion, but making comments intended to flame.


Is that not the pattern of the OP?  Start of a thread with some mal-informed comment, then refuse to come back to answer any of the points raised?  Wait for a bit for the dust to settle, then lob another one in.

----------


## secrets in symmetry

> Is that not the pattern of the OP?  Start of a thread with some mal-informed comment, then refuse to come back to answer any of the points raised?  Wait for a bit for the dust to settle, then lob another one in.


Indeed.

She's rather good at it, and at least her garbage is brief - two lines of childish trash are so much easier to ignore than several paragraphs of ill-formed lies and lunacy!

----------


## secrets in symmetry

> They even registered me on a forum or facebook group or something without me asking. Presumably they do this to all visitors to boost their quoted support numbers? The email I got to confirm this was from someone with the most proposterous made up Scottish name I've ever seen; Friseal MacFhearghais


Lol! These guys make up everything else they write, so why not make up their names as well?

Yours sincerely,
Haggis McDeepfriedmarsbar
(I would would prefer to use the Gaelic version of my name, but it wouldn't fit on the page....)

----------


## orkneycadian

I see that the "Island Revolt" (yes, we islanders are indeed revolting!  :Wink:  ) is gathering pace, with the appointment of an islander as Secretary of State for Scotland in Westminster...

http://www.orcadian.co.uk/2013/10/island-leaders-congratulate-new-secretary-of-state-for-scotland/

Do the plans for an independent Scotland have a contingency for if the islands are actually not part of the new seceded country?  How do the oil figures stack up then?

----------


## orkneycadian

Maybe the Island Revolt logo could do with some work though....   :Wink:

----------


## Oddquine

> I see that the "Island Revolt" (yes, we islanders are indeed revolting!  ) is gathering pace, with the appointment of an islander as Secretary of State for Scotland in Westminster...
> 
> http://www.orcadian.co.uk/2013/10/island-leaders-congratulate-new-secretary-of-state-for-scotland/
> 
> Do the plans for an independent Scotland have a contingency for if the islands are actually not part of the new seceded country?  How do the oil figures stack up then?


He didn't get the job because he was an Orkney MP.......though I do agree he is revolting!  :: 

Wouldn't make that much difference re oil, I shouldn't think...though it would all be down to negotiation, given the Islands would be an enclave in Scottish Waters on the Scottish Continental Shelf and while the base starting point is a 12 mile limit surrounding the Islands (with no oilfields within that area), they are nearer Scotland than 12 miles.  Hence the need for negotiations......though I suppose negotiations on that would require tit-for-tat negotiations on other things to benefit Scotland.

There is no definitive maritime border between Scotland and England yet though.......we have two different ones atm......the new 1999 one which England thinks will grab a chunk of oil fields.....and the 1987 one which ensures that Scottish Local Councils are required to pay for the policing etc of the rigs, despite the 1999 water grab.

----------

