[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

[quote=piemonster ]Ernie, apologies that wasn't an invitation to debate. It was a statement, it's also not the only reason.

If you don't want it debated, keep your thoughts to yourself - ernie was simply pointing out that it is an even worse reason for voting Yes than liking Braveheart. I'm quite sure that it has nothing at all to do with your decision - like most on here you've already made up your mind and simply looking for ways to justify your choice.

athgray - Member
I get the imression epicyclo that you reckon Scots in the Better Together campaign are not really proud for not subscribing to your vision of Scotland....

When I hear a sentence prefaced with "I'm a Proud Scot, but..." it resonates with that other sentence "I'm not a racist, but...", so I tend to be somewhat sceptical, especially when they're peddling fear, uncertainty, and disaster, rather than a positive vision of Scotland in the Union.

I have yet to hear one good reason to stay in. Heard plenty of scare stories though.

keep your thoughts to yourself

No

I can see you are struggling epicyclo. You reckon staying in the union would bring doom to Scotland. God knows I have heard plenty of scare mongering from the yes campaign. I will not deny I can see an unhappy path for Scotland after a Yes vote.

If the definition of a proud Scot is decided by either dear leader, the Yes campaign, or it's militant support then we have already set course for a dark destination.

I have already stated that the Saltire is being highjacked by the Yes camp. I find this worrying.

I can disagree with anyone on here about the best direction for Scotland or the UK, and can understand different peoples feelings on their own identity, but will not have my credentials as as proud Scot called in to question.

I have yet to hear one good reason to stay in.

You belong to a fairly stable and safe country.
A lot of people won't want to risk that, which is why the vote will probably be no.

You belong to a fairly stable and safe country.
A lot of people won't want to risk that, which is why the vote will probably be no.

Being honest, this is pretty much what I expect to happen.

Never underestimate people's aversion to change.

Am I remembering correctly that there was a last minute drop in support in 1979?

[quote=piemonster ]

keep your thoughts to yourself

Expect them to be debated then.

Hmmm.

I'm not suggesting you can't debate either the subject matter, or even my thoughts on that subject matter.

Just don't expect much response. For the moment fatigue has set in on that particular nugget.

I'm not 100% either way on Yes or No it's probably a 60/40 split which has been a 40/60 split. Don't assume I'm just looking for justification, some minds do change.

piemonster, just read your link and although it makes saddening reading, you could produce a stat like that for iS. Is the Duke of Buccleuch not the largest land owner in Europe?

Also if you care about the widening inequality gap in the UK, how does Scotland becoming independent help?

athgray - Member
I can see you are struggling epicyclo. You reckon staying in the union would bring doom to Scotland...

Struggling over what? The Union has been doom for Scotland.

What I want is to live in a democratic country. At the moment I do not. A country with an unelected upper house is not a democracy, no matter how much spin you put on it.

The Union has been doom for Scotland

[img] [/img]

the Duke of Buccleuch

I read that as Duke of Bukkake

The Union has been doom for Scotland.

What? 😆

It has been a couple of years since I strayed north of the border, have things changed that much in such little time or...?

big_n_daft - Member
"The Union has been doom for Scotland"
I thought that was the Darien Project

If there was ever a reason for the Scots to not go into a Union with England, it was the Darien Scheme. We'll be more careful next time. 🙂

As said we live in a pretty stable country. I will say, one with faults and massive improvements to make, but stable none the less.

I have stated that I can see iS going down the road of the Ukraine.
Can I envisage a country where mob rule and mob justice conquers all. Certainly. I don't like to point out differences between Scotland and rUK, but if there is, then it is a nationalists sense of political idealism, militancy, and a sense of moral superiority. It can seem like talking to climate camp protesters.

I don't think the majority of nationalist will partake in nastiness, however I think the excesses of the "Scoattish" mob will be tolerated. "They may be a**eholes, but they are OUR a**eholes!"

Eventually, dear leader will run out of scape goats and he will fall. Can I envisage a mob on the Royal Mile with Molotov Cocktails and flaming tyre barricades promoting regime change or kangaroo referedums? Yes.

As an aside, just back from an enjoyable weekend in Yorkshire. Chatting to people I did not get a sense that I was conversing with people of a different nation intent on electing governments to subjugate the Scots, promote war mongering, and increase the inequality gap. Those that think so need to get out more.

piemonster 🙂
I heard he has deep shag pile carpets.

What I want is to live in a democratic country. At the moment I do not. A country with an unelected upper house is not a democracy, no matter how much spin you put on it.

Are you really suggesting that because the Upper House, which has no meaningful power to block the will of the Lower House, is unelected, this defines Britain as an undemocratic country ?

The House of Commons is the supreme legislative authority in the UK. No individuals or institutions have more authority than the House of Commons, other than the EU of course (that's the hugely undemocratic EU which forces sovereign nations to comply with directives irrespective of the wishes of their electorate)

If you really want to dismiss Britain as an undemocratic entity because of a quirky hangover from long gone feudal days then your obvious target should be the Head of State.

But then of course an independent Scotland will still retain an unelected monarch as Head of State, won't it ?

I haven't really bothered much following the Scottish independence debate in any great depth but the one thing which particularly strikes me is how little thought the yes campaign appear to have dedicated to the issue.

Despite having had literally decades to come up with a carefully thought out strategy the SNP and the yes campaign seem to be making it up as they go along. Whether its what will happen after independence or the reasons for independence. The whole argument appears to be based on faith, hope, and wishful thinking. And for that reason alone I would vote no. How anyone can feel any confidence in the yes campaigners is beyond my comprehension.

ernie_lynch - Member
...But then of course an independent Scotland will still retain an unelected monarch as Head of State, won't it ?

I give that 6 months after the first elections...

athgray - Member
...I have stated that I can see iS going down the road of the Ukraine.
Can I envisage a country where mob rule and mob justice conquers all.

We won't need to. Scotland will be a democracy, and we will get the govt we have voted for, not what middle England wanted.

I give that 6 months after the first elections...

What's that based on.........faith, hope, or wishful thinking ?

The reality is that you really don't know what a post independence Scotland will be like. Bearing in mind that it's a one way road if that doesn't scare the undecided then I don't know what will.

ernie_lynch - Member
'I give that 6 months after the first elections..."
What's that based on.........faith, hope, or wishful thinking ?

Living here, talking to folk. I'll refine the prediction. The first election after the death of Queen Elizabeth the First.

So isn't the Scottish Government, which is proposing that the Queen remains Head of State in Scotland, also living in Scotland and talking to people ?

So isn't the Scottish Government, which is proposing that the Queen remains Head of State in Scotland, also living in Scotland and talking to people ?

Looking further afield than Edinburgh, a notional non elected head of state that can be above and removed from politics and on hand to do garden tours and lunch for visiting dignitaries actually seems like a good idea. The idea that you elect one person to run the country then another to run the country and another bunch to vote on it is mad. Just look at the US, president elected as the most powerful person in the free world (I think it says that in the application form/advert for the job) then can't actually do anything as the people who actually make the laws don't agree with him.

Politically there isn't much mileage in alienating the Monarchists in your ranks if you don't need to (and AS needs every vote he can) those that want to believe they will go for a republic can do but publicly they don't need to say they will.

Can't wait for the yes vote to be successful. We need a free England, free from the oppression of Scottish politicians at Westminster voting for things they would not allow in their own wee country. After this has been sorted it will be time to make the move for a free Yorkshire (ow much! The Yorkshire war cry). Now that'll be proper country, them spungers in Brussels will be begin us t be members of th EU. Then if that goes to plan it going to be a free Swaledale (upper), we'll not have folk from Richmond tellin us owt. An you can keep tha pound.

(ow much! The Yorkshire war cry)

genuine genius 🙂

(ow much! The Yorkshire war cry)

😆

Can't wait for the yes vote to be successful. We need a free England, free from the oppression of Scottish politicians at Westminster voting for things they would not allow in their own wee country.

In amongst the antagonistic charm, this is actually a very good idea.

I still believe the UK would be best served by dumping the Lords into a OAP home. Shoving an English parliament in and having a UK wide government for just the really big things. Like invading other peoples countries.

It's often been very useful to have an upper house that can delay and review legislation. The fact that the members are not beholden to party machines to keep their jobs is often cited as a positive. Most are now life peers rather than hereditary.

EDIT: a quick glance through the white paper indicates Scotland would have just a single chamber. The argument in favour of the House of Lords has always been that it helps stop, or at least slow down, abuses of power by the HoC.

Antagonistic charm? Freedom from the Parish Council, why should those on our street be told what to do by those that don't live on it. How small should a country be? Self determination for our house! I'll shortly be publishing a 600 page document that you'll never read that makes the case for an end of the parish council tyranny. It will include the odd bribe of baby sitting for mother. Cry freeeeeeeeeeeeedoooooommmm, freedom for our house and stuff the neighbours.

ernie_lynch - Member
So isn't the Scottish Government, which is proposing that the Queen remains Head of State in Scotland, also living in Scotland and talking to people ?

Which Scottish govt? That's what the current SNP party proposes. They are unlikely to be in power 2 elections in.

The SNP is basically a one policy party, a policy that over-rides everything else in the eyes of the electorate. Current support comes from a wide base of people, eg LibDems, Labour, and a few Conservatives who are voting SNP until such time as we get independence.

They will revert to normal voting habits after independence.

oldnpastit - Member
It's often been very useful to have an upper house that can delay and review legislation. The fact that the members are not beholden to party machines to keep their jobs is often cited as a positive. Most are now life peers rather than hereditary.

But they are still unelected. It's still not democracy no matter how often the establishment tells us it is.

May as well appoint a dictator (in the Roman sense). An upper house that is elected could do the same job.

ernie_lynch - Member
Despite having had literally decades to come up with a carefully thought out strategy the SNP and the yes campaign seem to be making it up as they go along. Whether its what will happen after independence or the reasons for independence. The whole argument appears to be based on faith, hope, and wishful thinking. And for that reason alone I would vote no. How anyone can feel any confidence in the yes campaigners is beyond my comprehension.

+ 1

You have to hand it to the deceitful one, his ability to unite people who normally/often fail to see eye-to-eye is without equal!!!

The democratic deficit idea is an interesting one when you have a central villain who is himself a classic bully, who shouts down and tries to suppress those who point out his follies (this Sunday being the latest example), who publishes deliberately misleading propaganda and rides rough shod over international precedent and norms. Oh and if you expect the H&Is to be better represented by the current narrow Scottish political elite (cough) then you will be disappointed. The Pareto principle works for all sizes of state!

The argument in favour of the House of Lords has always been that it helps stop, or at least slow down, abuses of power by the HoC.

The House of Commons can overcome any blocking by the House of Lords.

And what "abuses of power" ? If there has been any abuse of power I want it stopped, not slowed down.

epicyclo - Member

ernie_lynch - Member
So isn't the Scottish Government, which is proposing that the Queen remains Head of State in Scotland, also living in Scotland and talking to people ?

Which Scottish govt?

The Scottish government which the Yes campaign refers to......I assume they know what they're talking about about ? Or perhaps they don't ?

http://www.yesscotland.net/answers/would-queen-still-be-head-state-independent-scotland

mt - Member
Antagonistic charm? Freedom from the Parish Council, why should those on our street be told what to do by those that don't live on it. How small should a country be?...

About 5 million people is a good manageable size... 🙂

But you do seem to have an issue with letting people have a vote.

ernie_lynch - Member
The Scottish government which the Yes campaign refers to......I assume they know what they're talking about about ? Or perhaps they don't ?

They are declaring SNP policy.

Unlike some undemocratic countries the government is not being appointed in perpetuity.

It's an issue we will have a vote on at some stage. Wonderful thing, democracy. 🙂

They are declaring SNP policy.

The Yes campaign claim they are stating Scottish government policy, quote :

[b][i]The Scottish Government’s proposal is that the Queen remains Head of State in Scotland, in the same way as she is currently Head of State in independent nations such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand.[/i][/b]

It's an issue we will have a vote on at some stage.

So why doesn't the Yes campaign mention that then ? They make very clear that if people want a republic they will have to vote for republican politicians. Quote :

[b][i]In future Scottish elections voters can elect a party or parties that wish Scotland to become a republic, just as today we could elect politicians to Westminster who want the UK to become a republic.[/i][/b]

Your claims contradict the official Yes campaign. Sort yourself out if you want to present a convincing argument.

Despite having had literally decades to come up with a carefully thought out strategy the SNP and the yes campaign seem to be making it up as they go along.

Plus another one if I'm honest.

6 months to get rid of the Queen? None of the unionist parties have advocated this, it certainly does not appear in Scottish Governments white paper. President Salmond surely not. What other policies will he steamroller through when he gets his a**e on the throne.

epicyclo, some of your vision self perpetuate my view of what iScotland will become.

Antagonistic charm? Freedom from the Parish Council, why should those on our street be told what to do by those that don't live on it. How small should a country be? Self determination for our house! I'll shortly be publishing a 600 page document that you'll never read that makes the case for an end of the parish council tyranny. It will include the odd bribe of baby sitting for mother. Cry freeeeeeeeeeeeedoooooommmm, freedom for our house and stuff the neighbours.

Sea land aside, didn't some fella try this a decade or so ago?

Anyway, word is your troublesome neighbour Shedland. Has bankrupted itself with a failed attempt to colonise some shrubbery two streets away. The ruling classes in Shedland are already fairly friendly to MTland, I reckon if you lob a bag of gold through the door you'll be able to effectively expand MTlands borders a bit.

ernie_lynch - Member
"They are declaring SNP policy."
...You're telling me they're lying ?

No, they are stating their policy.

ernie_lynch - Member
Your claims contradict to the official Yes campaign. Sort yourself out if you want to present a convincing argument.

I'm not a SNP member. What needs sorting out?

Do all future political parties in Scotland have to have the same policies as the SNP? Surely you are aware there is a strong republican undercurrent in Scottish politics?

athgray - Member
epicyclo, some of your vision self perpetuate my view of what iScotland will become.

Good, I'm glad you're beginning to understand that it will be a democracy.

What other policies will he steamroller through when he gets his a**e on the throne.

It's really funny how people think Scotland will turn into North Korea - the Scottish electoral system is significantly more democratic than the Westminster one.

A SNP majority is an anomaly - it wasn't supposed to happen, the system was designed to prevent the SNP getting an overall majority - and after independence it'll most likely revert to a coalition.

North Korea? I specifically said the Ukraine more than once. Don't know where North Korea comes from. WOS I imagine.

For someone who does not follow the indy debate a lot, I reckon ernie is on the mark here.

I have stated that I can see iS going down the road of the Ukraine...

North Korea? I specifically said the Ukraine more than once.

Ah, well that's so much better 😉

I wasn't specifically commenting about you, but there seems to be a theory that the whole independence idea is Alex Salmond's personal project, so he can become a tin-pot dictator of his own little country.