The Big Scottish Independence Debate

[IBM]

The Referendum -  the gift that keeps on giving!  Now Scottish football supporters have promised to stop singing the dirge The Flower Of Scotland at upcoming Scottish matches. 

We can only pray that it is ditched as our unofficial anthem from all occasions  very soon.  What a gift that will be.

Not a chance it will take more than a referendum to stop us singing that

[+DoofersDad]

Ahem....the vows of further anything aren't worth the back of the fag packet on which they were written...as Ed Milliband, by 3pm today,  was scuttling backwards to distance himself from them. And so it starts as so many of us knew it would. The only thing any of them can agree on is that the UK is sunk without Scotland's oil underpinning their borrowing.

 

I'm betting that the "time table" will lengthen in the same way as the time table for accomplishing a balanced budget in the UK has as we don't meet expectations and are still borrowing.  And the promises of the political parties, even if genuinely meant, and I have always doubted they were, does rather depend on getting the  final proposals, when they are cobbled together, through both Houses of Parliament, whole and unchanged, when we all know what the chance of that is .......somewhere between ha!ha!ha! and nil.

 

And this, you will be delighted to know is my last post on this forum. I stayed too long after the connection alluded to by bauhaus was broken, because I rather enjoyed being here, but I think the time has come to depart, before my plethora of irritating "I told you so" posts start to come.

 

After all, when the inevitable happens and the austerity cuts, still to arrive, are made, the block grant is reduced through that and creeping privatisation (if it is not stopped altogether), and further reduced to pay for the cost of tax collection and for paying Westminster the interest on our own allowed borrowing, we will get services cut, or tax increased above the UK levels.

 

To the Yessers on here.keep on going on.....our time will come........and to the Noers...in advance of what is going to happen when the Scotland Act 2012 is introduced......"I told you so! 

It will be a shame if you stop posting, Oddquine, as your posts are always considered and you make your points in a courteous way without ever being offensive in any way. It's just that I rarely agree with you!

Take your post above. You state "The only thing any of them can agree on is that the UK is sunk without Scotland's oil underpinning their borrowing." Scotland's oil revenues are actually a pretty small amount of the UK's income. The level of Scotland's oil revenues are put into perspective when you consider that even at irresponsible top end projections, they were seen by the SNP to be wholly inadequate to pay for the programme of anti-austerity measures they unsuccessfully tried to bribe the Scottish electorate with. Such was the shortfall that they planned to borrow several billion pounds to pay for them.

I do, however, agree with you about the value of the back of a fag packet stuff. But let's not worry too much about pressing them to keep their word and scoring political points. Let's instead do what is best for Scotland. Ed Milliband is calling for a constitutional convention which would give us time to consider what is best for us. Far better to do it right than to do it quickly. Milliband's option seems the way to go.

Far better to work together as partners in a Union in deciding these things then negotiating costly divorce terms as competing separate states.

[Kingsmills]

 

Ahem....the vows of further anything aren't worth the back of the fag packet on which they were written...as Ed Milliband, by 3pm today,  was scuttling backwards to distance himself from them. And so it starts as so many of us knew it would. The only thing any of them can agree on is that the UK is sunk without Scotland's oil underpinning their borrowing.

 

I'm betting that the "time table" will lengthen in the same way as the time table for accomplishing a balanced budget in the UK has as we don't meet expectations and are still borrowing.  And the promises of the political parties, even if genuinely meant, and I have always doubted they were, does rather depend on getting the  final proposals, when they are cobbled together, through both Houses of Parliament, whole and unchanged, when we all know what the chance of that is .......somewhere between ha!ha!ha! and nil.

 

And this, you will be delighted to know is my last post on this forum. I stayed too long after the connection alluded to by bauhaus was broken, because I rather enjoyed being here, but I think the time has come to depart, before my plethora of irritating "I told you so" posts start to come.

 

After all, when the inevitable happens and the austerity cuts, still to arrive, are made, the block grant is reduced through that and creeping privatisation (if it is not stopped altogether), and further reduced to pay for the cost of tax collection and for paying Westminster the interest on our own allowed borrowing, we will get services cut, or tax increased above the UK levels.

 

To the Yessers on here.keep on going on.....our time will come........and to the Noers...in advance of what is going to happen when the Scotland Act 2012 is introduced......"I told you so! 

It will be a shame if you stop posting, Oddquine, as your posts are always considered and you make your points in a courteous way without ever being offensive in any way. It's just that I rarely agree with you!

Take your post above. You state "The only thing any of them can agree on is that the UK is sunk without Scotland's oil underpinning their borrowing." Scotland's oil revenues are actually a pretty small amount of the UK's income. The level of Scotland's oil revenues are put into perspective when you consider that even at irresponsible top end projections, they were seen by the SNP to be wholly inadequate to pay for the programme of anti-austerity measures they unsuccessfully tried to bribe the Scottish electorate with. Such was the shortfall that they planned to borrow several billion pounds to pay for them.

I do, however, agree with you about the value of the back of a fag packet stuff. But let's not worry too much about pressing them to keep their word and scoring political points. Let's instead do what is best for Scotland. Ed Milliband is calling for a constitutional convention which would give us time to consider what is best for us. Far better to do it right than to do it quickly. Milliband's option seems the way to go.

Far better to work together as partners in a Union in deciding these things then negotiating costly divorce terms as competing separate states.

 

On the other hand, cooperative separate states would be a different matter all together.

[+DoofersDad]

The Referendum -  the gift that keeps on giving!  Now Scottish football supporters have promised to stop singing the dirge The Flower Of Scotland at upcoming Scottish matches. 

We can only pray that it is ditched as our unofficial anthem from all occasions  very soon.  What a gift that will be.

Not a chance it will take more than a referendum to stop us singing that

I'd like to see the English football team stop using that equally awful dirge "God save the Queen". Mind you, it seems to be working - the old girl is still going strong.

[RiG]

Some sterling work being done by the No voters in Glasgow tonight it seems.

 

 

 

I see Better Together have already failed to deliver on their promise of a motion of powers today.

[starchief]

With the disgraceful scenes in Glasgow that 'resemble a football match' (hmmmm, wonder why?), maybe we should have independence for Glasgow.  We won't ask them, we will force them.  Bloody Old Firm embarrassment yet again!  Can we not just get rid of both of them once and for all?  Given that Glasgow had one of (was it 'the'?) lowest turn outs of all, I'm betting a good many didn't even put an 'X' in the box anyway.  Still, anything for a drink-fuelled fight over some ages gone Irish feud, eh?  Hate them both.

[RiG]

Indeed. Both very poisonous clubs who thrive on their hatred for one another exploiting it as much as they can yet look how it ends up when some of it spills out into the streets with 'normal' people. Desperately sad stuff.

[culduthel]

Today I am going to vote for the Nationalists !  

 

 

But in the New Zealand elections - and hopefully John Key and his team will return.

[Ayeseetee]

73% of over 65's voted no

 

 

71% of 16 - 17 year old's voted yes

 

 

 

 

 

Time for the waiting game...

Edited September 19, 2014 by Ayeseetee

[culduthel]

73% of over 65's voted no

 

 

71% of 16 - 17 year old's voted yes

 

 

 

 

 

Time for the waiting game...

 

 

This definitely proves the adage -    As you grow older you grow wiser.

 

Lots of young people at University become instant Marxists.  By the time they have left Uni and worked for a couple of years they realize what a load of old unworkable cr*p that is and become more moderate or liberal or conservative.

 

As a 16 - 17 year old I would have voted Yes as well - as would have many of the older folk who voted No on Thursday.

 

You will find as you grow older your views and opinions will change. That is one of the beauties of life.

 

In 15 - 20 years time or so these 31-37 year olds will more than deserve the opportunity to determine the outcome of a referendum on Independence. And best of luck to them.

[Ayeseetee]

 

73% of over 65's voted no

 

 

71% of 16 - 17 year old's voted yes

 

 

 

 

 

Time for the waiting game...

 

 

This definitely proves the adage -    As you grow older you grow wiser.

 

Lots of young people at University become instant Marxists.  By the time they have left Uni and worked for a couple of years they realize what a load of old unworkable cr*p that is and become more moderate or liberal or conservative.

 

As a 16 - 17 year old I would have voted Yes as well - as would have many of the older folk who voted No on Thursday.

 

You will find as you grow older your views and opinions will change. That is one of the beauties of life.

 

In 15 - 20 years time or so these 31-37 year olds will more than deserve the opportunity to determine the outcome of a referendum on Independence. And best of luck to them.

 

 

 

I think it has to do with that the fact the over 65's are more likley to favour the union as it had a function back when they were growing up.

 

alot of age group voted yes not only the teenagers!

Edited September 20, 2014 by Ayeseetee

[culduthel]

 

 

73% of over 65's voted no

 

 

71% of 16 - 17 year old's voted yes

 

 

 

 

 

Time for the waiting game...

 

 

This definitely proves the adage -    As you grow older you grow wiser.

 

Lots of young people at University become instant Marxists.  By the time they have left Uni and worked for a couple of years they realize what a load of old unworkable cr*p that is and become more moderate or liberal or conservative.

 

As a 16 - 17 year old I would have voted Yes as well - as would have many of the older folk who voted No on Thursday.

 

You will find as you grow older your views and opinions will change. That is one of the beauties of life.

 

In 15 - 20 years time or so these 31-37 year olds will more than deserve the opportunity to determine the outcome of a referendum on Independence. And best of luck to them.

 

 

 

I think it has to do with that the fact the over 65's are more likley to favour the union as it had a function back when they were growing up.

 

alot of age group voted yes not only the teenagers!

 

 

 

Your time will come eventually.   By that time though, you may be a crusty old conservative voting for the Union.       

[Scarlet Pimple]

What I found  to be very telling were the stats which clearly indicated  that the No vote was more or less ahead in almost ALL of the constituencies.

Only 3-4 areas in Scotland voted over 50% "YES". . Glasgow being predominant.

That clearly shows apprehension in the "no" voters's camps. When you look at the graphs the result is clearcut indeed.-NO rules. 

 

I noticed that Orkney had a  very high concentration of "no" voters . Did that mean that they were scared that their relative isolation away up there could count against their interests if a Yes vote won the day? I think so.

 

Inverness had a clearcut "No" vote also. Comments on that p[lease?

[Kingsmills]

Today I am going to vote for the Nationalists !  

 

 

But in the New Zealand elections - and hopefully John Key and his team will return.

 

Is that the New Zealand, the country with a population of less than five million who decided they no longer wanted to be governed from Westminster, who became independent, continued to use the pound sterling for many years after, have a policy of no nuclear weapons on their soil but don't seem to be at greater threat to their security   and who have largely prospered ever since ? Or is there a different New Zealand you speak of ?

Edited September 20, 2014 by Kingsmills

[+Tree]

 

Today I am going to vote for the Nationalists !  

 

 

But in the New Zealand elections - and hopefully John Key and his team will return.

 

Is that the New Zealand, the country with a population of less than five million who decided they no longer wanted to be governed from Westminster, who became independent, continued to use the pound sterling for many years after, have a policy of no nuclear weapons on their soil but don't seem to be at greater threat to their security   and who have largely prospered ever since ? Or is there a different New Zealand you speak of ?

 

 

Having lived in NZ, I think that you will find that as wondeful a place as it is it has suffered heavily during the recession (which barely impacted on its larger neighbour) and is struggling to deal with the cost of the post earthquake rebuild of Christchurch which is going to sink 8% of its GDP for the next 20 years or so. They also have issues with all the talent leaving for the bright lights of Oz where prospects are viewed to be much better

[Charles Bannerman]

With the disgraceful scenes in Glasgow that 'resemble a football match' (hmmmm, wonder why?), maybe we should have independence for Glasgow.  We won't ask them, we will force them.  Bloody Old Firm embarrassment yet again!  Can we not just get rid of both of them once and for all?  Given that Glasgow had one of (was it 'the'?) lowest turn outs of all, I'm betting a good many didn't even put an 'X' in the box anyway.  Still, anything for a drink-fuelled fight over some ages gone Irish feud, eh?  Hate them both.

The Yes campaign consistently said that people shouldn't have to live in a political environment that they didn't vote for. Glasgow didn't vote to stay in the UK so will presumably feel that it should not have to. Maybe they should therefore set up the Socialist Sectarian Republic of Greater Glasgow and become independent.

Yesterday morning, in outlining what I saw as a case for independence, I said that Scotland breaking away would have relieved the UK of a disaffected and divided minority at the cost of a declining resource. It would also have relieved the UK of a disproportionate dependence on the public purse with the added bonuses of removing sectarianism, Rangers, Celtic, The Krankies and The Bloody Proclaimers.

In reality, Glasgow breaking away would achieve nearly all of that, except (highly regretfully) geting rid of The Bloody Proclaimers and except giving up the oil since the thinking on that seems to be that it belongs to the territory nearest it.

There is a compelling logic here!

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

SIMPLES

 

 

[Charles Bannerman]

 

 

 

 

 

I think it has to do with that the fact the over 65's are more likley to favour the union as it had a function back when they were growing up.

 

alot of age group voted yes not only the teenagers!

 

 

 

Your time will come eventually.   By that time though, you may be a crusty old conservative voting for the Union.       

 

Absolutely true! One thing about being of the older generation is that you have actually seen this kind of thing happen to people time and again. On that basis I think there is a very high probability that, by the time he reaches 65, Clacherholiday2 will have become a dyed in the wool Tory!

[+bughtmaster]

I'm voting YES for Oddquine to stay

[Ayeseetee]

73% of over 65's voted no

71% of 16 - 17 year old's voted yes

Time for the waiting game...

This definitely proves the adage - As you grow older you grow wiser.

Lots of young people at University become instant Marxists. By the time they have left Uni and worked for a couple of years they realize what a load of old unworkable cr*p that is and become more moderate or liberal or conservative.

As a 16 - 17 year old I would have voted Yes as well - as would have many of the older folk who voted No on Thursday.

You will find as you grow older your views and opinions will change. That is one of the beauties of life.

In 15 - 20 years time or so these 31-37 year olds will more than deserve the opportunity to determine the outcome of a referendum on Independence. And best of luck to them.

I think it has to do with that the fact the over 65's are more likley to favour the union as it had a function back when they were growing up.

alot of age group voted yes not only the teenagers!

Your time will come eventually. By that time though, you may be a crusty old conservative voting for the Union. I would rip out my internal organs through my butthole with a rusty hook and follow that with a lemon juice enima before that ever happens...

Edited September 20, 2014 by Ayeseetee

[Oddquine]

All of you talking about acceptance and togetherness when discussing my words  ......how do you like the acceptance and togetherness shown by the NO thugs in Glasgow.

 

http://wingsoverscotland.com/enough-is-enough/

 

A quote......We watched it on live video feeds from the state broadcasters of other countries, ones we’ve been taught to regard as less truthful than our own. We saw it on pictures and Vines and video clips sent by people who were actually there. We know.

 

But we don’t know about it from the BBC. The BBC’s story was for many hours tucked away halfway down a piece about Alex Salmond resigning. Eventually it got a page of its own where it was portrayed as a clash between rival groups, rather than what it was – a mob of thugs attacking people who’d been peacefully and happily assembled in the square for days, with not a single disturbance or arrest.

 

Shame I can't join in the TV licence boycott being advocated.....as I stopped paying mine a few months ago after previous instances of blatant bias. .

[Scarlet Pimple]

The thugs and rioters--if they relate to the "no" camp what on earth can their behavior achieve for them?

 

As for youth and age affecting voters....

....well, when you are very young and in your teens, the world is your oyster and.. 

 

You instinctively know that if things go wrong then :

1.It won't necessarily affect you that much since you haven't got much of a clue what the repercussions may be anyway.

2. You can still recover from a mistake due to the lots of time you think you have ahead of you in the future.

3. You don't care that much because the world at this point is not known to you and it's your oyster and you simply think that you    still will  have  lots of time to open the shell.

4. You are upbeat, excited about your life and remain generally positive about things and haven't yet reached the stage where life has worn down every cotton-picking positive thought you ever had and you realize that everything is hopeless and beyond redemption.

5. Your sexual  drive is now  beyond puberty and is frenetically trying to fulfill itself and you already know, from the few experiences you have had, that it surely makes you feel relaxed and euphoric and so who cares about something like the outcome of  dull referendum at such times except that you love the great feeling you have about your growing power because you are now allowed to vote. 

6.You haven't learnt that throwing away your MacDonald's hamburger bag on some old codger's lovingly manicured garden/lawn might cause him distress  and may even enjoy the thrill of being chased by Uncle Sam.

 

 On the other hand, when you are over 60, all the above will surely no longer  apply and has been  replaced by :

1. A great relief that your country so far has escaped been nuked. 

2. You have managed to protect your yard with a fifteen foot fence which you strongly feel will deter the vulgar and bad-mannered  youth of your city from (a) invading your privacy. (b)Protect you from their  cursing and swearing in very loud raucous voices as they pass down your street © Noting that their bags now only litter your front driveway but not your manicured and immaculate lawn which, unfortunately, is now hard to see through the chain links so you no longer get compliments from the adult passers-by. 

3. The constant fear that  their children will turn out to be even worse than them and you don't want to move again because the thought of moving again  at your age is anathema.

4. You desperately regret not having put more cash aside for the rainy day that will now most likely occur after you die anyway;  but you feel the deeply satisfying need to keep holding on to it in the bank 'cos yer wife is still alive and twenty years younger than you are.

5. Due to the onset of more frequent visits these days from Al Zheimer, you are very worried about not being able to remember  where your pill box is when you need it most. Like when your now infrequent desires to become intimate with your  still lovely younger wife are stymied by the fact that your prostatitis is becoming more and more painful and you know that without your Arthrotec pills to cut down on the inflammation, coitus is rarely going to be an option again.

6. And, frankly, in some case you are overwhelmed by the desire to just have peace and quiet in your life, with no challenges and no worries about making the wrong decision, or concerns that younger women no longer give you the eye or tell you that they like your body etc. and that you really don't look 85  (if you are only 60). 

 

7. You get my drift..eh?

 

In other words, the more things change, the more they stay the same.  

[clacher_holiday2]

8. Voters over a certain age have been digesting all the information required to make what they consider to be an informed decision from media putlets firmly in favour of one of the two options.

None of whom broadcast the real dangers to pensioners benefits while staying in the Union, such as one day having to pay 20k per year for care as they do already in England or highlighting that the UK pension fund is secured by a credit rating rather than a valuable natural resource.

Sure, staunch and proud the old yins have been, with no fucks given for the people currently funding them who want a better deal.

[+DoofersDad]

All of you talking about acceptance and togetherness when discussing my words  ......how do you like the acceptance and togetherness shown by the NO thugs in Glasgow.

 

http://wingsoverscotland.com/enough-is-enough/

 

A quote......We watched it on live video feeds from the state broadcasters of other countries, ones we’ve been taught to regard as less truthful than our own. We saw it on pictures and Vines and video clips sent by people who were actually there. We know.

 

But we don’t know about it from the BBC. The BBC’s story was for many hours tucked away halfway down a piece about Alex Salmond resigning. Eventually it got a page of its own where it was portrayed as a clash between rival groups, rather than what it was – a mob of thugs attacking people who’d been peacefully and happily assembled in the square for days, with not a single disturbance or arrest.

 

Shame I can't join in the TV licence boycott being advocated.....as I stopped paying mine a few months ago after previous instances of blatant bias. .

 

The BBC is always cautious in broadcasting about emerging situations and quite rightly too.  Social media provides the opportunity for people to post images of a particular incident but the BBC will not broadcast such images until it can broadcast them within an informed context.  Let us consider a hypothetical scenario where images similar to those posted yesterday were posted on social media but with it being YES supporters charging into unionists, and then let us suppose that out of sight of the cameras was a much larger mob of pro unionist thugs who the yessers were running away from.  You would be rightly outraged if film posted by unionists in these circumstances was immediately broadcast with a commentary that independence campaigners were attacking unionists. 

 

The BBC will be aware of what is being posted on social media and will endeavour to find out the truth.  It's early reports refered to them as clashes between the two sides (which was correct) but did not apportion blame because they were not sure they had the full picture.  Later when it was able to verify facts it broadcast reports which made it crystal clear where the blame lay.  I really fail to see what you have to complain about with this report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-29294562 which appears prominently on the BBC website.

 

As for the level of prominence given to the incidents I'm really not sure what you expect.  Whilst obviously terrifying for those innocent folk caught up in it, this was a very small scale disturbance in the scale of things and nobody was seriously hurt.  After all, there were several rather more newsworthy things yesterday.

 

99.9% of the more than 2 million folk who voted no on Thursday will share your disgust at the action of the thugs and it is irritating that folk are trying to blow this up in order to discredit the better together cause by association.  Meanwhile, Alex Salmond, the man who has led the SNP from being a party with just a handful of seats to narrowly failing to win independence for his country, has resigned and nobody makes any comment about that.

 

By the way, you assured us yesterday that your post then would be the last on this forum - and here you are again today.  More lies from the YES camp!    - or are you back by popular demand?

[IBM]

All of you talking about acceptance and togetherness when discussing my words  ......how do you like the acceptance and togetherness shown by the NO thugs in Glasgow.

 

http://wingsoverscotland.com/enough-is-enough/

 

A quote......We watched it on live video feeds from the state broadcasters of other countries, ones we’ve been taught to regard as less truthful than our own. We saw it on pictures and Vines and video clips sent by people who were actually there. We know.

 

But we don’t know about it from the BBC. The BBC’s story was for many hours tucked away halfway down a piece about Alex Salmond resigning. Eventually it got a page of its own where it was portrayed as a clash between rival groups, rather than what it was – a mob of thugs attacking people who’d been peacefully and happily assembled in the square for days, with not a single disturbance or arrest.

 

Shame I can't join in the TV licence boycott being advocated.....as I stopped paying mine a few months ago after previous instances of blatant bias. .

Keep them coming Odquine very informative!