The Big Scottish Independence Debate

[Oddquine]

Willie Bell sounds like a man after my own heart!

 

Not overly keen on Mike Russell, tbh.....but to compare him to Gorgeous George.........come on!    

 

Can't think of anyone on the Yes side, offhand who is quite as irrational as Galloway...(bar maybe me..to save you saying it!)....but then, it just shows that we have less numpties than the ones on the No side who get all the media attention.......I can give you lists of them! 

 

Any response to my other questions, btw?

[Charles Bannerman]

Willie Bell sounds like a man after my own heart!

 

Not overly keen on Mike Russell, tbh.....but to compare him to Gorgeous George.........come on!  

 

Can't think of anyone on the Yes side, offhand who is quite as irrational as Galloway...(bar maybe me..to save you saying it!)....but then, it just shows that we have less numpties than the ones on the No side who get all the media attention.......I can give you lists of them! 

 

Any response to my other questions, btw?

Not really since they all seem just to be yet further convoluted restatements of your fundamental dislike of  Westminster , and your unshakeable resentment of what you perceive to be the bum deal "Westminster" has gone out of its way to dish out to the poor downtrodden Scots for the last 307 years.

 

In any case, this week I have been focusing rather more on the backside even falling out of the SNP "oil bribe".....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10616789/BP-chief-Bob-Dudley-attacks-Scottish-independence.html

 

And there's also the strong concern that while even your and my pension prospects look to be under serious threat in the event of a yes vote, it will be far worse for younger people who face a generally more challenging pensions environment in any case....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26015455

 

When this referendum was first mooted back in 2011 (God! It actually feels like a century!) my strong inclination to vote NO was largely motivated just by a straightforward belief in the principle that the UK needs to remain intact. Now, after three years of people constantly banging on about separation, I am in addition seriously worried about the emerging threat to the standards of living and quality of life which a yes vote would also pose for Scottish people.

Yes Scotland's strategy seems to be to try to get the turkeys to vote yes, without actually telling them that it's Christmas they are voting for.

[Oddquine]

 

Willie Bell sounds like a man after my own heart!

 

Not overly keen on Mike Russell, tbh.....but to compare him to Gorgeous George.........come on!  

 

Can't think of anyone on the Yes side, offhand who is quite as irrational as Galloway...(bar maybe me..to save you saying it!)....but then, it just shows that we have less numpties than the ones on the No side who get all the media attention.......I can give you lists of them! 

 

Any response to my other questions, btw?

Not really since they all seem just to be yet further convoluted restatements of your fundamental dislike of  Westminster , and your unshakeable resentment of what you perceive to be the bum deal "Westminster" has gone out of its way to dish out to the poor downtrodden Scots for the last 307 years.

 

In any case, this week I have been focusing rather more on the backside even falling out of the SNP "oil bribe".....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10616789/BP-chief-Bob-Dudley-attacks-Scottish-independence.html

 

And there's also the strong concern that while even your and my pension prospects look to be under serious threat in the event of a yes vote, it will be far worse for younger people who face a generally more challenging pensions environment in any case....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26015455

 

When this referendum was first mooted back in 2011 (God! It actually feels like a century!) my strong inclination to vote NO was largely motivated just by a straightforward belief in the principle that the UK needs to remain intact. Now, after three years of people constantly banging on about separation, I am in addition seriously worried about the emerging threat to the standards of living and quality of life which a yes vote would also pose for Scottish people.

Yes Scotland's strategy seems to be to try to get the turkeys to vote yes, without actually telling them that it's Christmas they are voting for.

 

Pot and kettle springs to mind with your continual railing against  the SNP, and Salmond etc! I speak re Westminster from what I know and have experienced.......maybe you have been luckier than a lot of us and Westminster policies have been good to you!

 

Dearie, dearie me......where do you get "backside even falling out of the SNP "oil bribe" out of what was reported and what was said on the Beeb!  What he said was You know there's much debate about currency, what would happen with the currency and of course connections with Europe or not."These are quite big uncertainties for us". What he said was " not concerned, but there's enough uncertainty to talk about it. "  What he said was "it depends on what the tax regimes are"  and he said "'quite big uncertainties'  if the sterling issue isn't resolved.

 

Now, I'm sure you will correct me if I'm wrong..but is it not Westminster  which is promoting and promulgating that uncertainty for their own Project Fear purposes, when we all know very well, that the uncertainty can be removed completely if they just say first .....that there will be negotiations, in the event of a YES vote, re a currency agreement (as will happen, imo), just as they did with saying they would repay all the National debt to mollify the uncertainty among UK bond-holders.....and second....wrote an official letter to the EU regarding the positions of Scotland and the rUK in the event of a yes vote. 

 

Result would be no uncertainty.....but then that would mean the end of Project Fear, which is, to date, the only weapon in their "positive" case for the Union.

 

As an aside....maybe Dudley is thinking of all the money he has wasted hiring George Robertson as a "special adviser" for his access to the Westminster corridors of power only to find that  it mightn't be Westminster corridors of power he needs to influence.

 

I dunno about you..but I paid my taxes and NI into the UK pot.....and the UK spent it when I paid it..and grabbed the VAT when I spent my salary.....so the UK owes me my pension, just as it owes it to everyone who buggers of to live in Spain or the USA to retire .and if, as Westminster says, rUK is going to be the continuing state....then the rUK pays my state pension...not Scotland. Cross-border and reciprocal agreements re pensions exist currently within the UK with different countries...why would that not apply to Scotland?

 

At the end of the day, Charles...all these Project Fear scares are not based on commonsense or pragmatism, but petulance and huffing......not a lot different to the petulance and foot-stamping of the wee boy in the playground saying "if you're not going to pick me to play, I'm taking my ball home so nobody gets to play".  In the end, between Governments, commonsense and pragmatism will prevail...you know it will...it isn't in any Government's interests to cut off their nose to spite their face.

 

Pleased for you your standard of living is so good.....mine is OK as well....but we are the lucky ones (at the moment...though pensioners have been mentioned as the next targets by IDS).

 

If you were disabled, in a rented house on state benefits  with a carer, and being hit with bedroom tax, PIP, ATOS, the benefit cap, the coming cuts to Carer's allowances etc and a VAT increase to 20%, which hits the poorest hardest, would you be so sanguine. Or if you were under 25 and lost your entitlement to housing benefit, so you had to become homeless or go back to live with parents, who may have no room for you (because they have downsized to beat the bedroom tax). 

 

You may be happy to live in a country in which you are comfortably enough off....but which punishes the disabled, the unemployed and our young people, in a country in which there are relatively few real jobs because they can't find a job. (I don't count zero-hours contracts and part-time work as real jobs unless they are a choice deliberately made because it suits their life-style/family commitments).and at the same time, fails to plug the loopholes which allows the rich and businesses to avoid tax, which cuts the tax rate for higher earners, which subsidises, with taxpayers money, the profits of businesses by the payment of working tax credits, allowing them to pay less than a decent wage..and continues to keep the UK one of the most unequal societies in the Western World, which continues to allow the banks to rip us off, which has privatised the utilities.and then allowed them to soak us to make shareholder profits and pay themselves ridiculous wages, which is gradually privatising the NHS......and which has made sounds regarding doing the same to Scottish Water and the Scottish NHS. 

 

I'm not defending the benefit levels, which are ridiculous, particularly the working tax credits and child credits, and are a result of the tit-for-tat eternal change expensively produced after pretty much every election, because of promises made to their voting demography. You can see it now with the feather-bedding of the grey vote (for the moment) because we old folks are most likely to vote in elections.so we don't have to "be all in this together"  but the benefits are the way  successive Governments have made it..and any entitlement culture has been instilled by Governments over decades.

 

Since Tony Blair, this country doesn't appear to like people who are taking out of the system, even though what they take out goes straight back in by spending, thus into VAT receipts and also  the profits of businesses, adding to their taxable income (which they then pay accountants lots of money to hide from HMRC). We have an incompetent UK Government focused only on furthering their ideology, but without the ability to polish up the same type of crystal ball forecasting the future consequences of their actions that they seem to think the Scottish Government has!

 

I really think Scotland can do better....I know Scotland can't possibly do worse.............and I am voting YES on that premise.....not for my benefit, but for my children, my grandchildren and my great grandchild.

[robbylad]

 

 

Willie Bell sounds like a man after my own heart!

 

Not overly keen on Mike Russell, tbh.....but to compare him to Gorgeous George.........come on!  

 

Can't think of anyone on the Yes side, offhand who is quite as irrational as Galloway...(bar maybe me..to save you saying it!)....but then, it just shows that we have less numpties than the ones on the No side who get all the media attention.......I can give you lists of them! 

 

Any response to my other questions, btw?

Not really since they all seem just to be yet further convoluted restatements of your fundamental dislike of  Westminster , and your unshakeable resentment of what you perceive to be the bum deal "Westminster" has gone out of its way to dish out to the poor downtrodden Scots for the last 307 years.

 

In any case, this week I have been focusing rather more on the backside even falling out of the SNP "oil bribe".....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10616789/BP-chief-Bob-Dudley-attacks-Scottish-independence.html

 

And there's also the strong concern that while even your and my pension prospects look to be under serious threat in the event of a yes vote, it will be far worse for younger people who face a generally more challenging pensions environment in any case....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26015455

 

When this referendum was first mooted back in 2011 (God! It actually feels like a century!) my strong inclination to vote NO was largely motivated just by a straightforward belief in the principle that the UK needs to remain intact. Now, after three years of people constantly banging on about separation, I am in addition seriously worried about the emerging threat to the standards of living and quality of life which a yes vote would also pose for Scottish people.

Yes Scotland's strategy seems to be to try to get the turkeys to vote yes, without actually telling them that it's Christmas they are voting for.

 

Pot and kettle springs to mind with your continual railing against  the SNP, and Salmond etc! I speak re Westminster from what I know and have experienced.......maybe you have been luckier than a lot of us and Westminster policies have been good to you!

 

Dearie, dearie me......where do you get "backside even falling out of the SNP "oil bribe" out of what was reported and what was said on the Beeb!  What he said was You know there's much debate about currency, what would happen with the currency and of course connections with Europe or not."These are quite big uncertainties for us". What he said was " not concerned, but there's enough uncertainty to talk about it. "  What he said was "it depends on what the tax regimes are"  and he said "'quite big uncertainties'  if the sterling issue isn't resolved.

 

Now, I'm sure you will correct me if I'm wrong..but is it not Westminster  which is promoting and promulgating that uncertainty for their own Project Fear purposes, when we all know very well, that the uncertainty can be removed completely if they just say first .....that there will be negotiations, in the event of a YES vote, re a currency agreement (as will happen, imo), just as they did with saying they would repay all the National debt to mollify the uncertainty among UK bond-holders.....and second....wrote an official letter to the EU regarding the positions of Scotland and the rUK in the event of a yes vote. 

 

Result would be no uncertainty.....but then that would mean the end of Project Fear, which is, to date, the only weapon in their "positive" case for the Union.

 

As an aside....maybe Dudley is thinking of all the money he has wasted hiring George Robertson as a "special adviser" for his access to the Westminster corridors of power only to find that  it mightn't be Westminster corridors of power he needs to influence.

 

I dunno about you..but I paid my taxes and NI into the UK pot.....and the UK spent it when I paid it..and grabbed the VAT when I spent my salary.....so the UK owes me my pension, just as it owes it to everyone who buggers of to live in Spain or the USA to retire .and if, as Westminster says, rUK is going to be the continuing state....then the rUK pays my state pension...not Scotland. Cross-border and reciprocal agreements re pensions exist currently within the UK with different countries...why would that not apply to Scotland?

 

At the end of the day, Charles...all these Project Fear scares are not based on commonsense or pragmatism, but petulance and huffing......not a lot different to the petulance and foot-stamping of the wee boy in the playground saying "if you're not going to pick me to play, I'm taking my ball home so nobody gets to play".  In the end, between Governments, commonsense and pragmatism will prevail...you know it will...it isn't in any Government's interests to cut off their nose to spite their face.

 

Pleased for you your standard of living is so good.....mine is OK as well....but we are the lucky ones (at the moment...though pensioners have been mentioned as the next targets by IDS).

 

If you were disabled, in a rented house on state benefits  with a carer, and being hit with bedroom tax, PIP, ATOS, the benefit cap, the coming cuts to Carer's allowances etc and a VAT increase to 20%, which hits the poorest hardest, would you be so sanguine. Or if you were under 25 and lost your entitlement to housing benefit, so you had to become homeless or go back to live with parents, who may have no room for you (because they have downsized to beat the bedroom tax). 

 

You may be happy to live in a country in which you are comfortably enough off....but which punishes the disabled, the unemployed and our young people, in a country in which there are relatively few real jobs because they can't find a job. (I don't count zero-hours contracts and part-time work as real jobs unless they are a choice deliberately made because it suits their life-style/family commitments).and at the same time, fails to plug the loopholes which allows the rich and businesses to avoid tax, which cuts the tax rate for higher earners, which subsidises, with taxpayers money, the profits of businesses by the payment of working tax credits, allowing them to pay less than a decent wage..and continues to keep the UK one of the most unequal societies in the Western World, which continues to allow the banks to rip us off, which has privatised the utilities.and then allowed them to soak us to make shareholder profits and pay themselves ridiculous wages, which is gradually privatising the NHS......and which has made sounds regarding doing the same to Scottish Water and the Scottish NHS. 

 

I'm not defending the benefit levels, which are ridiculous, particularly the working tax credits and child credits, and are a result of the tit-for-tat eternal change expensively produced after pretty much every election, because of promises made to their voting demography. You can see it now with the feather-bedding of the grey vote (for the moment) because we old folks are most likely to vote in elections.so we don't have to "be all in this together"  but the benefits are the way  successive Governments have made it..and any entitlement culture has been instilled by Governments over decades.

 

Since Tony Blair, this country doesn't appear to like people who are taking out of the system, even though what they take out goes straight back in by spending, thus into VAT receipts and also  the profits of businesses, adding to their taxable income (which they then pay accountants lots of money to hide from HMRC). We have an incompetent UK Government focused only on furthering their ideology, but without the ability to polish up the same type of crystal ball forecasting the future consequences of their actions that they seem to think the Scottish Government has!

 

I really think Scotland can do better....I know Scotland can't possibly do worse.............and I am voting YES on that premise.....not for my benefit, but for my children, my grandchildren and my great grandchild.

 

Aye. And bloody food banks too. That must be that quality of life Charles refers to.

Edited February 5, 2014 by robbylad

[Oddquine]

Aye. And bloody food banks too. That must be that quality of life Charles refers to.

 

It's a right wing Government thing........and not something liable to change even if the current UK Government does, given the reluctance of NuLabour to roll back any Tory policies at any time..as they tend to continue with them, but blame the previous Government for them. (Much as the Coalition is still blaming NuLabour for the fact that the Coalition has added a lot more than £400 billion to the overall national debt since 2010).

 

Food banks are the safety net of safety nets. It is only when government fails that food banks have to step in, and they show that welfare cuts and inefficiency cause hundreds of thousands of people to depend on emergency food aid. This Government has failed.

 

Problem in the UK is that the Government is just not accepting that their policies have anything to do with anything. Despite the fact that the Trussell Trust is practically a partner in the Welfare State, with the DWP  issuing vouchers for people to access food parcels on an emergency basis, Ian Duncan Smith has dismissed claims that the problems are linked to welfare reforms and attacked the charity for publicity-seeking. He further said that the reason more people access them is because they know they are there! Church leaders, many of whom work with the Trussell Trust, or have non-aligned Food Banks/Soup Kitchens, were incensed by reports in December that the government had turned down a potential pot of £22m of EU funding for food banks, on the grounds that the UK did not want to be told by Brussels how to spend money for European structural funds.   Go figure!

 

According to research last year for the Scottish Government, (DEFRA has produced research for the UK Government, but it has not yet been published....one wonders why!)  the top three reasons for referrals are currently benefit delay, benefit change and low income. There is uncertainty in when welfare recipients will receive money and how much they will be getting. Interviewees also reflected on the effect of the bedroom tax, an increase in sanctions and increased referrals from the Scottish Welfare Fund.

The statistics shows that 23,073  people (including 6500+ children) in Scotland were provided by Trussell Trust with emergency food parcels between April and September 2013.  Between Spring 2012 and Spring 2013 the Trust has seen a 170% increase in demand. Over half of referrals were related to benefit delays or benefit  change/withdrawal, an 11% increase on the previous year.

 

In 2009, there was one Trussell Trust foodbank operating in Scotland. By October 2013, this had increased to 42 established and 17 in development. As of October 2013,there are around 400 Trussell Trust foodbanks across the UK, which provided emergency food aid to around 400,000,  and they think, to fully address the problem, there would need to be between 750 and 1000............just how sodding sad is that in 2014 in a country which bums itself up as being a developed country, having the sixth biggest economy in the world and being a world "leader".  A world leader in what, I ask myself........wasting money on nuclear boy's toys and keeping the rich in the manner to which they have become accustomed? 

 

I'm inclined to think that it is the rich and the politicians who have the real "entitlement" mindset, not those they are trashing with monotonous regularity.....but what do I know.......maybe Cameron is worth £142,500 a year of our money to help the growth industry of food banks...and maybe the CEO of RBS is worth £1million a year, though I can think of no cogent reason as to why he is....... but then I buggered if I can see what makes Wayne Rooney worth £250,000 a week either, so I am obviously not a Thatcher's child.

 

 

 

 

 

[PullMyFinger]

Our oddballs are creative in a good way, unlike the unionists which create their own version of history.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-r_J14n100

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-znkbMzi4A

[Oddquine]

Thanks for that, PMF. I know the Alan Bissett one I've watched it a few times in other places, but have never watched the Cheviot, the Stag and the Black, Black Oil before, though I've heard about it.  

 

Just shows capitalist greed hasn't changed much over the last couple of centuries bar in the methods of satisfying it.....and nor have Governments.

[Scarlet Pimple]

How will that affect my very  small  DSS pension? Will it still be paid into my bank account in Scotland?

[Oddquine]

How will that affect my very  small  DSS pension? Will it still be paid into my bank account in Scotland?

 

It should be...banks are more than capable of transmitting money to foreign countries. Those of us already retired and receiving state pension are due our pensions from the country which ingathered our NI and taxes and used those taxes and NI contributions to add to the Westminster pot, in order to pay the pensions of those already retired while we were working. It shouldn't be affected income wise as long as we use sterling......but who actually pays it would depend on how pension obligations are negotiated....it may be that the SG would pay it after independence..and in that case it would be an internal transaction anyway.  Any problems will be those made up by Westminster to be difficult, imo.

[The Mantis]

How will that affect my very  small  DSS pension? Will it still be paid into my bank account in Scotland?

Somebody mentioned you had a very small stipend

[Oddquine]

The English make the case for a break-up

http://gulfnews.com/opinions/columnists/the-english-make-the-case-for-a-break-up-1.1288693.which was originally in the FT on the 6th, but you don't have to register or answer a silly question to read it on the above link.

 

And Ian Bell's letter to David Cameron, who sat  wrapping himself in red, white and blue Olympic glory well away from Scotland, while cringingly love-bombing us.

 

It's from Saturday's Herald, as reproduced by  http://subrosa-blonde.blogspot.co.uk/ to save people paying for access..but I reproduce it in full.

 

Forget the postcard Dave, it’s time to pay us a visit

Dear Dave,

I can call you Dave? It turns out we're friends, after all. From what you say, we could even be family. This alone is exciting news. We've never had a Tory in the family before, least of all one even slightly worried about what we might think or do. But I digress.

That was quite a speech you gave there, Dave. I'm sorry I couldn't attend, but you know how it is. Paying a visit is next to impossible if you're on a busy schedule. In any case, the border is all but impassable, by all accounts. These days even a Prime Minister can't find his way north to deliver an affectionate speech, or refresh himself with an invigorating debate.

It's a pity. A lot of us would really - I mean really - like to see you. We could catch up. You could tell us all your news and your plans for next year and beyond. It would be a lot more fun, I promise, than fighting your way to the Olympic Park through that hellish London traffic. As ever, you can be assured of a warm welcome.

Still, we read your postcard with the speech on it very carefully. (The kisses at the end were much appreciated.) Parts of it seemed a little familiar, like one of those chain letters, but our French Canadian friends assure us this is nonsense. Your completely original thoughts bore no resemblance to the slogans of the 1995 Unity scheme cooked up when Quebec looked like voting for independence. Pure coincidence.

True, the stuff about getting people to show how much they care did the trick in Canada. They also told Quebec at the last minute how much it was appreciated, needed and wanted. There was even talk - quite a bit of talk, actually - of Canadians being better off together than apart. But really: who would cynically copy someone else's campaign tactics when there are deeply personal emotions needing to be expressed? Spontaneously, of course.

We're a bit confused, though, Dave. If we read your Wish You Weren't Thinking of Not Being Here card right, we can expect a lot of phone calls on those friends and family tariffs. Thanks to you, we're about to be up to our armpits in endearments. But it's not as if we really need introductions to these folk, or reminded of what they think. They were not strangers last year and they won't be strangers next year.

And what's this "We want you to stay?" We're not actually going anywhere. If you would just tell your Chancellor and your other ministers to stop messing about, visitors in a couple of years will hardly notice the difference. What we might notice will be - as you are kind enough to remember - our affair. But you'll still be able to go around the world "banging the drum" for whisky. If you value your balance of payments, that is.

We hope you had fun at the Olympic Park, Dave. Clearly, that was some of our money - well, freightloads, to be accurate - well spent. You're obviously attached to the place. A less imaginative politician might have decided the games have been over for a bit. He might have wondered if the symbolism wasn't a tiny bit overused, or asked himself what sport can really tell you about countries. A less brilliant politician might have said it was all getting a bit tacky.

Don't let us put you off. You were born to wear red, white and blue. That is, of course, your privilege, but it's not a look we can all carry off. You won't mind, in the meantime, if your line about "the summer that patriotism came out of the shadows and into the sun" pops up again in a few months? No-one can teach you anything about nationalism and optimism, Dave, and you surely wouldn't object to a bit of plagiat, as they say in Quebec.

Here's the thing, though, that's giving us a few problems over your invitation to join you on the sunlit uplands. You tell us we're at the heart of "a vision". You reckon the United Kingdom will be "deeply diminished" without Scotland. You paint the rosiest of pictures of worth, esteem and partnership. But be honest, Dave: that's not exactly what we hear from those who speak on your behalf, is it? Your reports don't quite match what we hear day in and day out from your personal Team GB.

Perhaps they didn't get the memo. These things happen. But while you talk about shared values, about freedom, solidarity and compassion, some of your friends don't do positive. Instead, they tell a story you didn't manage to mention.

That's the one about chaos, ruin and economic degradation, worthless currencies, bankers fleeing to the border to claim new passports, pensions unpaid, jobs lost, food unaffordable, and international ties severed. Lately, they've been taking the veils off the threats, Dave, and it's all getting a bit tiresome. If more of us believed the tale we could use it to frighten children. Still, it's a shame you forgot to say in your speech that the nonsense has to stop. Did you lose a page?

By the sounds of things, it might have been more than one. You said a bit through your Olympic Park loud-hailer about the kind of country you want to see, the sort of UK that you and your government have in store for us if we follow your advice on September 18. But then there were a couple of tiny gaps in that inspiring narrative.

We weren't taken aback to notice that you didn't go into details about social security, bedroom taxes and the like. You didn't find time to explain why your Chancellor's austerity programme rolls ever onwards when things are going so swimmingly: that was understandable, even predictable. But, no offence, your enthralling vision didn't include the answer to a question that has bothered a lot of us: what happens when the society you mean to create is not one we would consent to inhabit?

We get the news up here. We can see what you intend for the welfare state. We've a pretty good grasp now of how you regard the NHS, education, or the rights of working people. A lot of us don't find it congenial. When we see how things are going, many of us don't believe that the partial protections of devolution are enough.

It's hard to know how to put this nicely, so I'll just say it: exactly how did you become our Prime Minister in the first place, Dave? Your speech was addressed to us among the peoples of these islands. You do remember how the vote went here last time, and you know how it will go next time if we follow your guidance on September 18?

One last thing. That stuff about "the brand", Dave? Drop it, there's a good lad. It's embarrassing. As to the rest, if this is what we can expect should you visit over the next seven months, the best of British.

Regards.

 

Ian Bell might, of course have added that after the big speech, Twitter was aflame with people furth of Scotland saying go for it, Wish you luck etc. Not quite what was intended, I suspect.....and I haven't had one single love bomb phone call.

Edited February 10, 2014 by Oddquine

[IBM]

Another good post Oddquine, I have not had one phone call, email or text from my friends and relations (and there are quite a few) south of the border so the message from our Prime Minister has not worked!

[+DoofersDad]

I don't think the English South of the border really care one way or another.  If pressed they are probably generally in favour of the union but at the same time probably have the view (rightly or wrongly) that the Scots receive more Government spending per head of population than they contribute and therefore won't be greatly missed.  

 

It is more likely the exiled Scots who won't have a vote who will let us know what they think.  Anyhow, they can say what want. I live in Scotland and will vote the way I want to and not how someone who doesn't live here would like me to vote.

[Oddquine]

I don't think the English South of the border really care one way or another.  If pressed they are probably generally in favour of the union but at the same time probably have the view (rightly or wrongly) that the Scots receive more Government spending per head of population than they contribute and therefore won't be greatly missed.  

 

It is more likely the exiled Scots who won't have a vote who will let us know what they think.  Anyhow, they can say what want. I live in Scotland and will vote the way I want to and not how someone who doesn't live here would like me to vote.

I'm inclined to agree........there are certainly some on forums and in comments in the media who are holding the door open and prodding us out it with a big stick accompanied by chortles of glee....and some who don't blame us, wish us well and hope that, by our going, the rest of the UK might get a push into sorting out their own relationship with Westminster and the city state of London...but the vast majority are conspicuous by their absence.  I already have at least three cousins in Scotland who will vote NO...and if they can't get me to change my mind..slim to no chance the cousin in England I haven't clapped eyes on in twenty years, if he gives a toss at all, is going to manage any better. 

 

The "getting more back than they contribute".or not thing is really hard to quantify.......I have heaps of GERS/PESA/IFA/OBR reports and out of them I have about 100 text files of figures.and it is down to what "getting back" means (and how you decipher accountancy-speak thirty five years and a generation+ on.) . And, tbh what English taxpayers think it means. From websites and forums, it appears that many of them really do believe that the Block Grant is the whole of the money Scotland puts into the UK pot plus we get the likes of our Welfare payments and Defence spending from Westminster on top of the block grant and Westminster pays everything out of English money..so they subsidise us.   QED!     If that was the case, Cameron would be packing our bags himself!  

 

However, I'm inclined to look at it more as to what we contribute now to help pay for in the UK that we don't/wouldn't need or want in an independent Scotland....like the salaries, expenses, pensions etc of 1500 or so legislators, their thousands of civil servants over all departments, advisers, administrators and the maintenance and support of the Palace of Westminster; the upkeep/leasing of around 5000 embassies/consulates and salaries etc/support for around 3000 diplomats world wide.

 

Economies of scale only apply if you can reduce your costs by embracing them...and don't apply if that means you are stuck with paying, as part of the bargain, for something you'd never have dreamed of having in the first place..like Trident.  Economies of scale, like Boxing Day sale bargains are only worth the money if you need them...and we don't need 1500 expensive legislators in London when we have our own in Scotland that we already pay for..and we don't need to be paying for 5000 UK Embassies/consulates, which appear to be on the posh side, when we neither need as many.....or as posh.because we aren't going to be pretending we are a world power.

[Charles Bannerman]

I don't think the English South of the border really care one way or another.  If pressed they are probably generally in favour of the union but at the same time probably have the view (rightly or wrongly) that the Scots receive more Government spending per head of population than they contribute and therefore won't be greatly missed.  

 

It is more likely the exiled Scots who won't have a vote who will let us know what they think.  Anyhow, they can say what want. I live in Scotland and will vote the way I want to and not how someone who doesn't live here would like me to vote.

You mean like Eshenpee shupporter Shur Shaun who lovesh hish country sho much that he ushed to shtay in Shpain?

The problem with these expats getting a vote would have been that none of them is going to have to live with the consequences in the event of a yes. Also, far too many people who may have begun life as domiciled Scots but now live abroad float about on some misplaced, Braveheart-motivated cloud of pseudo-romance and look nostalgically on Scotland as some kind of Brigadoon theme park.

Edited February 11, 2014 by Charles Bannerman

[PullMyFinger]

 

I don't think the English South of the border really care one way or another.  If pressed they are probably generally in favour of the union but at the same time probably have the view (rightly or wrongly) that the Scots receive more Government spending per head of population than they contribute and therefore won't be greatly missed.  

 

It is more likely the exiled Scots who won't have a vote who will let us know what they think.  Anyhow, they can say what want. I live in Scotland and will vote the way I want to and not how someone who doesn't live here would like me to vote.

You mean like Eshenpee shupporter Shur Shaun who lovesh hish country sho much that he ushed to shtay in Shpain?

The problem with these expats getting a vote would have been that none of them is going to have to live with the consequences in the event of a yes. Also, far too many people who may have begun life as domiciled Scots but now live abroad float about on some misplaced, Braveheart-motivated cloud of pseudo-romance and look nostalgically on Scotland as some kind of Brigadoon theme park.

 

As opposed to those who walk around with their heads up their arses?

 

Question for Laurence, I've seen the White Paper "Scotland's Future" on sale on Ebay and Amazon for silly money considering it's free to every household in Scotland. How much would one be worth were it signed by the Scottish cabinet ministers? (I'm not selling, just curious) I won first prize in a raffle at a Yes Burn's supper and Charles will love this, I had the choice of the signed white paper or a gallon of Malt Whisky. 

 

Here's a picture of me being presented it by Miss Scotland   

 

[PullMyFinger]

Fuxake, I forgot to post this from Bella.

 

http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/02/11/falling-over/

[Oddquine]

 

I don't think the English South of the border really care one way or another.  If pressed they are probably generally in favour of the union but at the same time probably have the view (rightly or wrongly) that the Scots receive more Government spending per head of population than they contribute and therefore won't be greatly missed.  

 

It is more likely the exiled Scots who won't have a vote who will let us know what they think.  Anyhow, they can say what want. I live in Scotland and will vote the way I want to and not how someone who doesn't live here would like me to vote.

You mean like Eshenpee shupporter Shur Shaun who lovesh hish country sho much that he ushed to shtay in Shpain?

The problem with these expats getting a vote would have been that none of them is going to have to live with the consequences in the event of a yes. Also, far too many people who may have begun life as domiciled Scots but now live abroad float about on some misplaced, Braveheart-motivated cloud of pseudo-romance and look nostalgically on Scotland as some kind of Brigadoon theme park.

 

Good Grief, Charles.for a purported journalist, you don't have much of worth to say, do you?   .  Debate on the very important subject of Scottish Independence should be more than a few snide remarks invoking the Godwin's law of the anti-Independence brigade (Braveheart, Brigadoon and Brave (though you did miss that one out))

 

Where is  your listing of what benefit Scotland has had from the UK  for the input we have made to convince us a NO vote is the sensible option...and by that, I mean Scotland as a country, all we plebs, all our infrastructure, all our industry, our levels of poverty and inequality etc....and not individual Scots, who, as in 1707, certainly did well, mostly by going south.  What happened to the £27 extra billion the UK got from us and spent between 1979 and 1997, as admitted by William Waldegrave.....how did that benefit Scotland? Where does the £400 million or so we don't get back every year go, if not to Scotland?  

 

I'd be interested in a cogent explanation as to how a country of 5.3 million people managed to acquire a £7+billion fiscal deficit in 2011-2012, when the Scottish Government balanced the budget they were at liberty to spend (being unable, unlike local Government, to borrow for themselves)......and we still have crap roads north of Perth, high levels of poverty, a lack of social housing etc.

[Charles Bannerman]

 

Good Grief, Charles.for a purported journalist, you don't have much of worth to say, do you?   .  Debate on the very important subject of Scottish Independence should be more than a few snide remarks invoking the Godwin's law of the anti-Independence brigade (Braveheart, Brigadoon and Brave (though you did miss that one out))

 

 

Oddquine, after more than three years in the trenches, even the soldiers in the First World War (Oops! Don't mention the War. I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it!  ) managed to dilute the misery and the tedium with a bit of humour.

Look, we've been suffering this tedious referendum crap for a very long time now with more still to come and I think we need a bit of a laugh as a bit of light relief from it - well perhaps apart from Derek Bateman who, since he vacated the airwaves, seems to have found another medium in the form of a blog to indulge in his apparent life's preoccupation of constantly banging on about this referendum.

[bauhaus]

It seems at the moment the Con Dem party ruling us are doing a tremendous job in not just doing as much as it can for the super bubble around London, they are scoring a huge own goal with the Scottish rain they are getting. Seems that they pay as much attention to those areas not to far from London as they care about Scotland normally. The fall out from this, and the current lying and bickering about the Environment agency will show people how much they care about outlying areas of England. Damaging their support in the stronger Con Dem south, and it will truly show the rest of the UK what they care about those areas away from London.

 

See they are even seemingly flooding some areas to help avoid the well off London suburbs from getting hit by the floods, typical. This country is currently too Londoncentric, which is such a shame. Its not as if their is no talent and intelligence outside of London.

[Charles Bannerman]

This country is currently too Londoncentric, which is such a shame.

Well if that is a concern for you, why should anyone expect Highlanders to vote in September for an outcome which would be completely Edinburgh or Glasgowcentric? The SNP have already taken away our local control of police and fire and rescue as well as hamstrung our local councils by imposing a Council Tax freeze and we could expect a lot more of the same if the central belt get a 100% say over our lives.

Funny how the separatists bang on about the evils of the centralisation of power whilst imposing just that themselves.

[dougiedanger]

 

 

Good Grief, Charles.for a purported journalist, you don't have much of worth to say, do you?   .  Debate on the very important subject of Scottish Independence should be more than a few snide remarks invoking the Godwin's law of the anti-Independence brigade (Braveheart, Brigadoon and Brave (though you did miss that one out))

 

 

Oddquine, after more than three years in the trenches, even the soldiers in the First World War (Oops! Don't mention the War. I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it!  ) managed to dilute the misery and the tedium with a bit of humour.

Look, we've been suffering this tedious referendum crap for a very long time now with more still to come and I think we need a bit of a laugh as a bit of light relief from it - well perhaps apart from Derek Bateman who, since he vacated the airwaves, seems to have found another medium in the form of a blog to indulge in his apparent life's preoccupation of constantly banging on about this referendum.

 

 

Puerile attempts at "humour" are a further sign of an inability to engage with the debate and of increasing desperation as the tide turns in favour of independence.

 

Keep laughing CB...

[Joe DiMaggio]

 

 

Good Grief, Charles.for a purported journalist, you don't have much of worth to say, do you?   .  Debate on the very important subject of Scottish Independence should be more than a few snide remarks invoking the Godwin's law of the anti-Independence brigade (Braveheart, Brigadoon and Brave (though you did miss that one out))

 

 

Oddquine, after more than three years in the trenches, even the soldiers in the First World War (Oops! Don't mention the War. I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it!  ) managed to dilute the misery and the tedium with a bit of humour.

Look, we've been suffering this tedious referendum crap for a very long time now with more still to come and I think we need a bit of a laugh as a bit of light relief from it - well perhaps apart from Derek Bateman who, since he vacated the airwaves, seems to have found another medium in the form of a blog to indulge in his apparent life's preoccupation of constantly banging on about this referendum.

 

 

The only tedious thing on here is you Charles. Constantly going on about the SNP and Braveheart etc. I know what to expect everytime I scroll down and read your name. Most boring and repetative poster on here.

 

And there we are again on your next post, something about the SNP (I switched off). For someone who likes to think they are really clever you fail to understand the difference bewteen an election and a referendum. What the SNP think just now will not be how Scotland is run in 20 years time. I await your next post which will no doubt mention the SNP or Braveheart.

[Charles Bannerman]

 

 

 

Constantly going on about the SNP and Braveheart etc.

 

What the SNP think just now will not be how Scotland is run in 20 years time.

 

There is one reason and one reason only why we are being put through this referendum just now - the SNP proposed the legislation and the SNP ensured that it passed through Holyrood. Otherwise we would just be getting on with our lives unmolested by its sheer tedium. This is their project from start to finish.

And if what the SNP think is not how Scotland would be run in 20 years time in the event of a yes vote, why have they said, written and promised so much that depends on government policy post-2016, which they can't possibly hope to guarantee to deliver?

Quite frankly the whole referendum business is boring me to tears with politicians from both sides being distracted on to its soapboxes rather than using their energy to run our affairs. The only real relief is to have a bit of a laugh about it.

Edited February 11, 2014 by Charles Bannerman

[Oddquine]

 

This country is currently too Londoncentric, which is such a shame.

Well if that is a concern for you, why should anyone expect Highlanders to vote in September for an outcome which would be completely Edinburgh or Glasgowcentric? The SNP have already taken away our local control of police and fire and rescue as well as hamstrung our local councils by imposing a Council Tax freeze and we could expect a lot more of the same if the central belt get a 100% say over our lives.

Funny how the separatists bang on about the evils of the centralisation of power whilst imposing just that themselves.

 

 

The centralising of the police and fire services wouldn't necessarily stay centralised anyway after Independence........it would depend on the elected Government of the day and how well it has worked out.

 

The reason they are currently centralised is would you believe....the same Economies of Scale you cite as a benefit for staying in the Union.,.and was done in order to cut costs, so that our limited pocket money went further....into, for example, ameliorating the effects of UK welfare policies on our citizens. Into the bargain, it removed the ongoing responsibility of financing those services from local authorities. Given it has been up and  running for less than a year, it's a bit early to say if it does or doesn't work.

 

I can't quite understand the mindset which thinks that pumping all our cash into London, 560+ miles away from Inverness is going to be much much better for us  than sending the same money to Edinburgh, which is about  400 miles nearer. I can't quite understand the mindset which thinks that it is preferable to pump money, (more than we get via Barnett), into the 610 square miles of the GLA containing 13% of the UK population rather than into the Central Belt which has about 70% of the Scottish population in the area in, around and between Edinburgh and Glasgow.

 

Also can't quite understand how it can be so much better to have 7 MPs out of 650 representing the Highlands and Islands in Westminster, as opposed to 15 MSPs out of 129 in Edinburgh doing the same.

 

Please explain your reasoning..