Well, after months of dithering and thinking. I made decision.
I read this, and it cut through to the real decision. Do I want to have more decisions made by more local people? Yes.
http://www.lesleyriddoch.com/2014/08/lets-concentrate-on-real-debate.html

Piemonster its good to know even tories are embarrassed to admit it in public

Is 1992 not modern enough?

I was not in the country back then so my knowledge is limited of what happened then

Reasonable point tbh. So that is 2 in 50 years and I am going to go out on a limb here and suggest Yes voters are not shy about saying it 😉

Well, after months of dithering and thinking. I made decision.
I read this, and it cut through to the real decision. Do I want to have more decisions made by more local people? Yes.
http://www.lesleyriddoch.com/2014/08/lets-concentrate-on-real-debate.html

That’s very good, thanks.

That’s very good, thanks

Aye, interesting read.

Reminds me I must get around to reading Lesley Riddoch’s Blossom – people keep saying it’s very good.

The author really should take her own advice and concentrate on the real debate. What a lovely flowery article full on interesting yet unlinked points leading to the wrong conclusion.

Let’s write several paras on Scottish education system and then make two spurious jumps to eg energy and the poltical process. The oldest trick in the book and equally transparent. Especially when you make it look relevant ie, why is is relevant, before completely ignoring the question.

Just wild assumption and fairy tales about how voting yes is going to transform society. Unsubstantiated croc.

As the comments in the FT today we respect to the equally spurious argument that a yes vote is the paths to full employment, this is nothing more that general aspirational stuff combined with deceit. As the NIESR note, Swinney’s fluff on full employment is not fiscally neutral and is based on “a bizarre view that you can doe what you want on the fiscal side and not worry too much on the currency side.”

I guess yS will be rolling out Hans Chrtisten Anderson for the final push…

Do I want to have more decisions made by more local people? Yes.

Why then vote for a system where the most important decisions will be made by a foreign country with no little if any respect to your needs? Bizarre.

THM, you don’t get to decide what the real debate is. Each individual voter does.

That’s the same trick Better Together keep trying – telling everyone that the currency is the big issue, even the only issue, because they can’t think of any other arguments.

Its an interesting take on it and it is strange that economic matters has been the cornerstone of the debate.

We [ the west] are wealthy, wealthy enough to achieve and prioritise social goals over the eternal quest for more wealth whilst rewarding the winners and demonising the losers [ shirkers].
Nice food for thought IMHO about the different outlooks on what people/societies want to achieve.

It goes without saying I prefer the egalitarian method of the scandanvian approach

FWIW their child abuse figures are startling as well

The World Health Organization (2002) provides homicide incidence figures for children aged 0 to 4 in Sweden (1996), Canada (1997) and the United States (1998).1 These figures are:

Sweden: 3; Canada: 24; United States: 723

(Canada’s population is approximately 3 times larger than Sweden’s. The U.S. population is approximately 20 times larger than Sweden’s.)
You can make society better for all or you can care most about your pension pot.

EDIT: i wrote thatbefore reading THM post butthis sortof sums it up really

Why then vote for a system where the most important decisions will be made by a foreign country with no little if any respect to your needs? Bizarre.

Do you really think ordinary folk think this is the most important thing in their life or a country? I bet you think they do not because they are stupid and dont get it 🙄
Did you actually read the piece. It was written about your attitude and you still did not get it and then did it. Oh the ironing

ninfan – Member
“we’re too dumb to be able to organise anything big like that to meet our needs ie people who want to fly directly to Scotland.”
Nothing to do with that- its to do with having a critical mass of people who want to travel that route big enough to make running flights there economically viable…

You’re implying we would be too dumb to do market research first to find that out.

35 days to go

You can make society better for all or you can care most about your pension pot.

Amen to that.

True Ben, but that doesn’t excuse making spurious links to support an argument. I benefitted from the quality of Scottish education many moons ago and my son may do the same, so I agree with the basic points that she makes in that regard. It suits certain people. But that has got sweet FA to do with the points she is making. Perhaps I am being thick and you can demonstrate the link between taking broader highers and the rate of taxation?

Of course, the mess in Europe is being hidden by this, Iraq and Robin Willams, but the (incorrect) choice of currency is having a direct impact on the issues that you seem to hold dear – jobs, prosperity, inequality etc. The lessons of history are clear, you don’t get the most important decision wrong. You can try to deflect attention away from this truism but as the DO has found out, it has a nasty habit of coming back to bite you on the backside.

Fifteen para and two point – five of which in education. Then a spurious link which ends by destroying itself

and reforms to schooling alone won’t change that.”

ExActyl, so why spend 1/3 of the article talking about the education system. Really let’s get down to the real debate.

As I note above, today it (sorry still the surreal debate) is the fact that YES will give you Full Employment along with the iPad app that allows you to identify each if the little piggies in the sky.

Its an interesting take on it and it is strange that economic matters has been the cornerstone of the debate.

Plus ca change!

You appear to have forgotten the essential building blocks of successful politics:

THM – it’s not the most important decision. Countries change currencies all the time. It’s important, sure, but not as important as independence.

I get it – you think that a currency union wouldn’t happen, and would be very bad if it did. Some Yes voters might agree with you, I lean that way sometimes*. But other things outweigh that – being able to get rid of the nuclear weapons, being responsible for our own decisions instead of being able to blame others, setting up an oil fund to save for our children instead of stealing from them by lumping them with mountains of debt. Currency matters, other things matter more.

*Because a CU requires sensible, reasonable negotiation from grown-ups. I don’t think we can trust the current government to not be vindictive and spiteful, because they already are. They may well be willing to cut off their own nose to spite their face.

Ah, a decision to refuse a CU would be out of spite, rather than because it would be a bloody foolish to take on the financial risks of another country for a limited return!

The narrative of blame for failure post independence is already being laid…

But other things outweigh that – being able to get rid of the nuclear weapons…, . True but not in the table, remember what don’t ask, don’t tell really means

…being responsible for our own decisions instead of being able to blame others

…already in place, you are now proposing to give away the big ones, on the last point that will be a relief.

setting up an oil fund to save for our children instead of stealing from them

stealing???? Jumping late on the oil find argument is not a vote for independence.

by lumping them with mountains of debt

the link? Are you saying that AS is going to decimate financial services and the provision of credit in Scotland. True he has made quite a good start…..but his plans require significant debt financing that will leave Scotland with high levels of debt.

So again, nothing more that vague aspirational wishlists. Perhaps we can add that AS will sort out he wheel debate nice and for all as well?

FWIW, I think Scoltand’s best interests are served in the union, but if independence is genuinely desired then this is best achieved with an independent fully floating currency. The fudge of the CU achieve nothing other than a fudge. Actually that’s not true, the CU and/or sterlingisation gives an iS less not more power. That is why it’s a stupid idea.

Countries change currencies all the time.

In all my years in finance, I missed that one. pls tell me more….

Anyway must get on….

That’s the same trick Better Together keep trying – telling everyone that the currency is the big issue, even the only issue, because they can’t think of any other arguments.

@ben BT keep focusing on the currency as its a major weakness in the Yes campaign and AS keeps trying to dodge the question of “what if” so digging himself deeper and deeper into a hole. Currency is such a powerful argument as it resonates with the average voter, what money will you have in your pocket ?

@TMH it’s OK for the lady to speak about the emotive aspects of her decision as a Yes vote is an emotional vote not a logical one

Also I too believe an independent Scotland will have higher levels of debt than the UK, firstly to pay for the infrastructure build out and secondly to pay for this fairer society we keep hearing about.

In all my years in finance, I missed that one. pls tell me more….

Ireland changed from it’s own pound to Sterling, to a pound pegged to Sterling, to a pound not pegged to Sterling, to the Euro. Every other country in the Euro previously had it’s own currency. Various former Eastern Bloc countries changed from the Ruble to their own currency or the Euro.

“Its an interesting take on it and it is strange that economic matters has been the cornerstone of the debate.”

the purpose of the state is to serve the populace. it can only do that if it is able to collect enough tax. the amount it can collect in tax is massively affected by economic performance.

The economy is important. yessers active disengagement with the subject is an indication they’re motivated predominantly by emotional issues ie Frrrrreeeeeee…

We build the society we want, and make the economy work for us – not the other way around. Sure, it matters, and it affects what we can do, but it’s not the most important decision.

Perhaps I am being thick and you can demonstrate the link between taking broader highers and the rate of taxation?

Perhaps i am being thick but could you highlight the part in the article that makes such a direct claim? The broad claim is that scotland cares about different things – a number of examples were give. Rather ironic that you keep ignoring them and just return to economic issues- that was the point of the article called
Let’s concentrate on real debate
Amusing though in a face palm way

being responsible for our own decisions instead of being able to blame others
…already in place

No amount of spin can portray scotland as having responsibility for all its decisons. Its just BS ,as you would say to AS, though i prefer factually inaccurate to describe it.
Scotland can fully do as she wishes and is not constrained by another govt that they did not vote for…good luck with that one as you rail against deceit.

Its just not true and this is why you call troll and just insult me

The economy is important.

I do not think anyone would disagree tbh but you may also want to prioritise a variety of other goals.

IMHO the constant striving for economic growth and yet more wealth is somewhat pointless. Personally I would rather have a fairer society and more free time than more money – i am in the minority there though.

IMHO those who focus on the economy/money/wealth* do so because wealth itself is a goal rather than wealth being a vehicle to achieve social justice or an other goal
Of course you need money to achieve this but other things matter as well as just making the most amount of money possible.
It shows how far we have all become mini Thatchers/capitalists/selfish where we think of money first and then everything else second.
For example ben may be marginally financially worse off but he could also live in a fairer society as the pay off. A price worth paying IMHO and a stark difference between Scotland and England

* a general comment rather than a comment on this thread or posters here.

For example ben may be marginally financially worse off but he could also live in a fairer society as the pay off. A price worth paying IMHO and a stark difference between Scotland and England

Exactly, and sometimes it’s impossible to put a price on such things. For example, how much compensation is reasonable for the risk of dying in a nuclear fireball? Reducing that risk obviously has benefits, but how much in money terms?

You can’t quantify it.

Ben, not exactly all the time is it. In fact is is very, very occasionally. Why? Because it’s important, strategic and utlimately costly. You do not do it on a whim and you get your facts right first. Unless you want to end up like the periphery of Europe. You only need to look at what is going on in Europe RIGHT NOW to see how the incorrect currency choose affects all aspects of lives.

Jamabalaya – respect her emotional/emotive issues and the specifics of Scottish education. But as put, they have bugger all to do with the vote. That article mixes them up despite trying to make obvious links where they do not exist. She indirectly admits that herself.

The fascile arguments about being “better off” without the evidence to support how this is going to happen do not help anyone. It’s mere fantasy land. Take pensions – dismiss at your peril but it is irresponsible for politicians to do this especially with an ageing population. Industry bodies cry our for clarity but instead they get subterfuge. Shocking.

What’s the big deal about pensions? The government has confirmed that people’s state pensions will be unaffected (just as they are for ex-pats at the moment). For private pensions you have a contract with your pension provider – they will have to do some sorting out, maybe, but that’s not beyond the acumen of such people.

A very interesting article in Bella Caledonia:

Dinner with No Voters or “What I wanted to say before the Pudding hit the fan”

We build the society we want, and make the economy work for us – not the other way around.

no, wrong – the state can only spend what it takes in.

Well done for missing the second sentence in that paragraph where I say almost exactly that 😉

Let’s concentrate on real debate

Politic speak for “let’s avoid the debate that embarrasses my point of view.”

indeed but it works both ways
No /the UK said they would not pre negotiate so lots of the economic questions are basically we do not know and there is obvious uncertainty as there is with any change. No try to discuss this rather than argue that the current set up is democratic and represents the wishes of the scottish electorate.
Both sides are trying to do this- debate where they are strongest – is anyone surprised by this?
IMHO no set it up very well so ys could not answer questions and have beaten them well with this. Politics is a dirty game.

For example, how much compensation is reasonable for the risk of dying in a nuclear fireball?

You do realize that if Scotland goes independent, it’s still **** if rUK starts a nuclear war, right?

You do realize that if Scotland goes independent, it’s still **** if rUK starts a nuclear war, right?

Its alright, I don’t think he’s yet got his head round the concept that the whole point of a submarine based deterrent is that nuking Faslane would make little strategic sense, because the missiles are thousands of miles away under the ocean…

Its alright, I don’t think he’s yet got his head round the concept that the whole point of a submarine based deterrent is that nuking Faslane would make little strategic sense, because the missiles are thousands of miles away under the ocean

I do understand that concept, yes. So you think there weren’t any Soviet missiles targeted at Faslane? 🙄

It’s a strategic military asset, of course it would be on the first-strike list. As would Glasgow, probably, along with all major cities.

You do realize that if Scotland goes independent, it’s still **** if rUK starts a nuclear war, right?

As is everyone else, if a nuclear war starts. However getting rid of them from Scotland is a step on the road to disarmament, and it also reduces the risk of nuclear accidents.

No /the UK said Both parties agreed they would not pre negotiate so lots of the economic questions are basically we do not know and there is obvious uncertainty as there is with any change

That’s OK because the SNP will have done lots of research and taken all of the variables into account to arrive at their ‘Scotland will be £5billion better off’ claims.

Or maybe they just make it up as they go along;

Milk and Honey?

…a step on the road to disarmament…

Right. As if we’ll get to a stage where there’s only one country left with nukes, and they’re not going to say “Right, folks. Listen up. We’ve got nukes. You don’t. Each and every one of you is now our bitch. Try arguing and see what happens”.

In fact, the more we travel down the path of nuclear disarmament the closer we get to a fully renewed Cold War:
“Right, you dismantle your nukes.”
“No, you first. We insist.”

That’s OK because the SNP will have done lots of research and taken all of the variables into account to arrive at their ‘Scotland will be £5billion better off’ claims.

Or maybe they just make it up as they go along

Not at all. I believe Salmond has taken legal advice on the matter, so he knows exactly how it’s going to pan out.

Right. As if we’ll get to a stage where there’s only one country left with nukes, and they’re not going to say “Right, folks. Listen up. We’ve got nukes. You don’t. Each and every one of you is now our bitch. Try arguing and see what happens”.

The UK has less than 2% of the nuclear weapons in the world – removing that number won’t make much difference to the world situation, but it’ll make us safer – and there’s the moral side of it too.

Independence won’t make Scotland safer from nuclear war. There is a very low probability of nuclear war now, and being the neighbour of a party to global annihilation isn’t any safer than being the party to it yourself.

In fact, the more we travel down the path of nuclear disarmament the closer we get to a fully renewed Cold War:
“Right, you dismantle your nukes.”
“No, you first. We insist.”

You’re being facetious but the START treaties were highly successful in achieving the dismantlement of nuclear weapons. 80% of every weapon created was destroyed. There are still enough to obliterate the planet, obviously.

80% of every weapon created was reportedly destroyed.

FTFY – linky

Independence won’t make Scotland safer from nuclear war.

Maybe, maybe not, it might get us taken off some target lists. What it will do is remove all the nuclear convoys from our roads, remove the risks of a nuclear accident, prevent the discharge of nuclear waste into the Clyde (the MoD have asked to increase the amounts they’re allowed to discharge), and free us of the moral issue of possessing WMDs.

Oh, and it’ll save us a ****load of money.

The Americans privately wish the UK would get rid of our nukes anyway – they’re no help to US strategic plans and they mean we can’t afford more useful conventional forces.