Forum menu
Missed that one Ben!!!!
iPads are a nightmare for typos 😉 and unintentional autocorrects!
AS doesn't have another plan, he has been truthful about that (!)
Amusingly I find it hard to believe he has not thought of a Plan B at some point. I can see why he wont ever say what it is publicly. Amusing role reversal here with me thinking he is being dishonest and you believing him 😀
I think they can leave debt therefore it is true. Neither of us think they will so I dont see the sense in debating whether it would be folly or prudent as it wont happen.
OK its sunny i have carb loaded its ride o clock
See you in two hours 😉
athgray - Member
I can see if you win, you have no concern in trodding on the views of a large portion of fellow Scots....
Just like if they win, they won't care about my views? That's what happens when you win/lose a vote.
If only we could get rid of this troublesome democracy stuff. Perhaps by having an elected house full of sock puppets to keep the masses happy, but with an upper house full of people who share our values to keep the sock puppets under control. With an establishment controlled press we would have no problem convincing the masses they have democracy.
Now how can we go about getting such a system? Oops, we already have it... 
THM turn the autocoreect off ! I think by complaining abiut your ipad auto correct you may br reinforcing North/South divide steriotypes 😉
@ben you are taking a percentage of the land, the top bit as it where. An interesting side factoid is that whilst you are getting more than 9% of the area you are getting less than 9% of the value. I personally don't see the parallels between Scotland and Canada/Australiia examples, they left the Empire many years ago when natural rescourcex where cheap/plentiful/undiscovered. You can try the moral/historical argument all you like but its not going to count for anything. Scotland (may) want to leave the UK, it has to do it on the UK's terms.
Weve been round the currency thing many times, AS knows he has to takr the euro if he wants to be in the EU. He equally knows he cannot say so as its likely to be a massive vote loser.
As no one has answered my questions on Scottish banks, I'll do so research myself. Standard. Life I believe set up a bank but not sureif they still have it as it didnt reallywork out. TSB, RBS, BOS are just brands owned by UK banks.
epicyclo, I find some of your views deeply troubling. Even if the result goes in favour of No, I understand a significant number of Scots are not happy. A No result will not be cause for celebration. Not wishing to see the UK break up in future, the views of this large portion of FELLOW Scots will have to be considered. I would like to think we could move to a devo max arrangement. Your use of 'they' to describe the other side is perhaps most worrying of all.
Jambalaya - I know! On banks, I have explained on here earlier. Depends on legal status eg branch v subsidiary.
As no one has answered my questions on Scottish banks, I'll do so research myself. Standard. Life I believe set up a bank but not sureif they still have it as it didnt reallywork out. TSB, RBS, BOS are just brands owned by UK banks.
What is your question? Whether there will be any retail banks in Scotland after independence? Whether there will be any Scottish-headquartered banks after independence? It's unclear what you're asking.
athgray - Member
epicyclo, I find some of your views deeply troubling. Even if the result goes in favour of No, I understand a significant number of Scots are not happy. A No result will not be cause for celebration. Not wishing to see the UK break up in future, the views of this large portion of FELLOW Scots will have to be considered. I would like to think we could move to a devo max arrangement. Your use of 'they' to describe the other side is perhaps most worrying of all.
True enough, if it is a No vote, then we will continue to keep working for separation. In the same way as we have for the last 100 years, peacefully and using the democratic process.
As for a devo max, that would have been a good solution but it was not offered.
I believe a federated UK with independent parliaments for each of the respective countries might have worked.
As far as I am concerned, any solution which includes an unelected upper body is unacceptable, and I will always oppose it.
We're a Jock Tamsons bairns
[i]As for a devo max, that would have been a good solution but it was not offered.[/i]
Was it even asked for? Didn't the SNP campaign for an independence referendum and not devo max? In the event of a no vote devo max needs to provide benefits to Scotland and the rUK. If it doesn't then it shouldn't happen, Scots should take into account that they might not get devo max and vote accordingly in the independence referendum.
fasternotfatter - Member
...Didn't the SNP campaign for an independence referendum and not devo max? In the event of a no vote devo max needs to provide benefits to Scotland and the rUK. If it doesn't then it shouldn't happen, Scots should take into account that they might not get devo max and vote accordingly in the independence referendum.
The independence movement is much more than just the SNP, so there's divergent opinions on what is best.
I agree, devo isn't on offer, so the only choice is to vote Yes for independence (or otherwise).
Judging by some of the comments coming from the unelected house, it looks like if we vote No, then we will once again be punished for our temerity in wanting separation - just like 1979.
At least this time we know what to expect if we're daft enough to believe vague promises from the UK govt.
The independence movement is much more than just the SNP, so there's divergent opinions on what is best.
Except that it isn't, is it ? Last Scottish general election the SNP received 45% of the vote, the latest opinion poll puts support for Scottish independence at 34%
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/05/18/uk-scotland-independence-polls-idUKKBN0DY0D020140518
So a good chunk of SNP voters don't support independence. If support for independence doesn't even extend to all SNP supporters then it's not likely to extend much beyond the SNP.
Scotland (may) want to leave the UK, it has to do it on the UK's terms.
ernie_lynch - Member
The independence movement is much more than just the SNP, so there's divergent opinions on what is best.
Except that it isn't, is it ? Last Scottish general election the SNP received 45% of the vote, the latest opinion poll puts support for Scottish independence at 34%...
Oh dear.
Let's see, on one hand we have an actual vote - which shows 45%.
On the other hand we have a poll, which is basically extrapolated opinion based on a small sample, and it shows 34%
Which to believe? Reality, or the politically motivated poll?
BTW the polls before the last election were also similarly very pessimistic about the SNPs chances. It's almost as if there was a guiding hand...
they left the Empire many years ago when natural rescourcex where cheap/plentiful/undiscovered
Okay, let's look at this in detail - you want to divide the oil reserves up by population, right?
Is that the relative population today, on the day of independence, or when the oil is actually pumped out of the well? Because population number change.
And is that all the oil that is possibly in the North Sea? We don't know how much there is. Or is it only the declared reserves? In which case what do we do when more oil is discovered, or it turns out a well doesn't have as much as predicted?
Now, does this only apply to oil, or does it apply to other resources? Coal? Gas? Shale oil? Limestone, silica sand, gold, timber? Same questions apply to those - how on earth do you divide those up by population?
It's totally unworkable, which is why it's never happened - never mind the reason that it's in Scottish territory so it's Scottish.
Oh dear.Let's see, on one hand we have an actual vote - which shows 45%.
On the other hand we have a poll, which is basically extrapolated opinion based on a small sample, and it shows 34%
Which to believe? Reality, or the politically motivated poll?
Oh dear.
You think there is a "politically motivated" conspiracy involving Reuters and ICM.
Last Scottish general election the SNP received 45% of the vote, the latest opinion poll puts support for Scottish independence at 34%.
do any of these polls show that no tories, labour supporters, lib dems or others support independence
Your a big fan of the polls what do they show? i looked for as much as two perhaps three minutes then got bored
i did find this though
Wilson is part of a quiet revolt that may, some polls suggest, swing the result, seeing as many as 250,000 Labour supporters vote yes
Its the guardian though - well what would you expect 😉
Its certainly more a SNP than the others but not exclusively...more bitter toegther project fear eh 😛
BTW the polls before the last election were also similarly very pessimistic about the SNPs chances. It's almost as if there was a guiding hand...
IIRC most polling companies recorded a big swing to SNP in the run up nearer to the election did they not? It was just that Panelbase recorded a high SNP result further out from the actual vote?
That's a question btw.
do any of these polls show that no tories, labour supporters, lib dems or others support independence
Well I guess that some Tory, Labour, and LibDem voters, will be supporting "independence", which would put support for independence among SNP supporters even lower.
Bearing in mind that most supporters of Scottish independence will have voted SNP, and most SNP supporters will support independence, it shows that support for independence isn't, contrary to claims made by epicyclo, "much more than just the SNP". It's probably a little more, but not "much more".
Your a big fan of the polls what do they show?
I recognise that within limitations they can provide a reasonable assessment of public opinion. This recognition isn't based on whether or not the opinion polls are saying what I want them to say.
A little while ago, in fact only a week or two ago, all the saltire waving nats on here were wetting themselves in excitement because the opinion polls were showing shifts in their favour, now that this no longer appears to be the case they are instead dismissing opinion polls as some sort of "politically motivated" conspiracy.
Engage in hypocrisy if you want, but I prefer not to.
[b]Bencooper, this page:[/b]
Okay, let's look at this in detail - [u]you want to divide the oil reserves up by population[/u], right?Is that the relative population today, on the day of independence, or when the oil is actually pumped out of the well? Because population number change.
And is that all the oil that is possibly in the North Sea? We don't know how much there is. Or is it only the declared reserves? In which case what do we do when more oil is discovered, or it turns out a well doesn't have as much as predicted?
[u]Now, does this only apply to oil, or does it apply to other resources? Coal? Gas? Shale oil? Limestone, silica sand, gold, timber?[/u] Same questions apply to those -[u] how on earth do you divide those up by population?
[/u]
It's totally unworkable, which is why it's never happened - never mind the reason that [u]it's in Scottish territory so it's Scottish.[/u]
[b]Bencooper, page 12 of this very thread:[/b]
Then divide by the percentage of the UK population who live in Scotland.
Yup, absolutely. [u]Everything gets shared that way[/u] - assets, liabilities, things where no-one can agree if they're assets or liabilities, [u]everything. It's the only fair way to do it.[/u]
ernie_lynch - Member
Oh dear.
You think there is a "politically motivated" conspiracy involving Reuters and ICM.
Nope, I just think the polls have proven to be wildly inaccurate, so either their methodology is wrong or they are being manipulated. Take your choice.
The only thing that counts is the actual vote.
Talking of which, we have one coming up....
You made it very clear that you think the opinion polls are "politically motivated". Read your own posts.
I already know what I think.
Just thought you might like to consider why they are so far out.
Ninfan, I refer you to my reply way back on page 12 - you're confusing an asset and a natural resource.
Well you don't seem to know what you think. Firstly you dismissed the ICM poll as "politically motivated", then when you realised the absurdity of that you backtracked and claimed that you meant "wildly inaccurate".
There's a big difference between "politically motivated" and "wildly inaccurate", as I'm sure you realise.
you're confusing an asset and a natural resource.
Given your stance on what a currency is
Hahahahahahahahah 😆
However I'll repeat your own words to you again
[i][u]Everything[/u] gets shared that way - assets, liabilities, things where no-one can agree if they're assets or liabilities, [u]everything[/u]. It's the only fair way to do it.[/i]
So, which part of the word [i]Everything[/i] did I not understand Ben?
...put support for independence among SNP supporters even lower.
I would think that support for independence among SNP supporters would be very high, among SNP voters is another thing. Don't confuse the two.
ernie_lynch - Member
Well you don't seem to know what you think...
I do, however I have no control over your interpretations.
Ernie I asked for evidence [polls]to support your claim repeating it is not actually evidence.
Engage in hypocrisy if you want, but I prefer not to.
I asked for the polls you did not post any and I am the hypocrite 😯
FWIW I dont actually have much of an opinion here tbh I asked for evidence what you gave me was your opinion again with some really hurtful nasty words...meany 🙄
so do you have polls showing what way supporters of each political party intend to vote or not? we dont need to debate it we could have actual facts rather than your opinion for a third time.
I asked for the polls you did not post any and I am the hypocrite
I haven't called anyone a "hypocrite". I suggested that being enthusiastic about opinion polls when they are in your favour but then dismissing them when they weren't amounted to hypocrisy.
You either pay attention to opinion polls or you don't, irrespective of whether they back up your agenda or not. I thought the logic behind that was obvious.
As for your question whether I "have polls showing [i]blah blah[/i]" I know better than to try and engage in any meaningful debate with you, especially on this thread.
You predictably come out with bollox like "you gave me was your opinion again with some really hurtful nasty words", or "you called me a hypocrite", and quite frankly I can't be arsed beyond superficial and cursory comments. And I generally avoid reading most of what you post - I suggest that you perhaps take a reciprocal attitude towards me ? 🙂
Do either of you need a cuddle?
JY might.....I've been hurtful and nasty to him apparently.
So, which part of the word Everything did I not understand Ben?
Okay, I should probably have been clearer. "Everything" doesn't include air, soil, the British sense of humour, natural resources, and pretty much anything that's, well, nonsense to try to share by population.
So how do you think it would work? How would you divide up the oil?
I'm supposed to be the one clinging to some idea despite the facts 😉
and pretty much anything that's, well, nonsense to try to share by population.
Like the pound?
So how do you think it would work? How would you divide up the oil?
Like the pound?
You continue to want to pick and choose your interpretation of what amounts to an 'asset' that can be divided in the most dubious and preferential fashion Ben!
It remains a lot easier and achievable to allocate equitable shares of the oilfields than it is to share the 'asset' of an established currency...
If iScotland wants a share of banknotes then that is fine. It just doesn't get the rUK as a lender of last resort.
[quote=ninfan ]
bencooper » and pretty much anything that's, well, nonsense to try to share by population.
Like the pound?
😆
[quote=konabunny ]
Like all "obvious" things I'm not sure it's at all obvious - though it would probably help if you listed those you think you have now. Isn't there an EU rule about banks having to be based in the country in which they do most of their business?
Are you suggesting that there would be no banks in an independent Scotland? Are you predicting that HSBC, the Coop and whoever else has outlets would simply withdraw from the market? Are you saying investment banks wouldn't arrange finance for businesses? Is that your question?
I think you're referring to jambalaya's question, not mine, despite quoting me. I was assuming the question was about banks being head-quartered in iS rather than just having branches there, though I may have been wrong about that.
It remains a lot easier and achievable to allocate equitable shares of the oilfields
Go on, then - how do we do it? By reserves? By resources? By area? When do we pick to compare populations? What do we do about capital investment costs, fluctuating oil prices, etc etc?
I haven't called anyone a "hypocrite".
How did i manage to quote you saying it then? Though I suppose you could claim you were accusing someone of engaging in hypocrisy but you were not actually calling them a hypocrite. it would be disingenuous but you could do it
You either pay attention to opinion polls or you don't, irrespective of whether they back up your agenda or not. I thought the logic behind that was obvious.
Apparently what you do ernie is say what they say twice and when someone asks you to produce them you say
As for your question whether I "have polls showing blah blah" I know better than to try and engage in any meaningful debate with you, especially on this thread.
I will aspire to treat being asked to prove what i claim about polls [facts] with the maturity you have done
Aracer - yes, sorry, that's right!
Dare it mention the McCorne book again as one source for examining how you spilt various items such as oil etc?
It woiuld be odd for Scotland not to ask RBS and HBOS to established separately capitalised subsidiaires in Scotland, if nothing else for a bit of nationalistic face saving.
Jambalaya - MemberWeve been round the currency thing many times, AS knows he has to takr the euro if he wants to be in the EU
I don't know if you believe this or not but I'm pretty sure we've been over the reasons it's wrong about 3 times in this thread alone.
I have to admit from a purely intellectual curiosity perspective I would quite like Scotland to vote yes, as AS applying to join the EU with the stated intention of not joining the Euro (which I think would be a unique position - I don't think even Sweden did that) is one of many things I'd like to see how the negotiations go. In case of doubt, I'm not suggesting they won't be allowed in if he does that, simply that it could result in some interesting diplomacy.
Dare it mention the McCorne book again as one source for examining how you spilt various items such as oil etc?
You can if you want,but as pointed out by,well...everybody, nobody up here trusts him or ever will. Making conciliatory noises about our ability to manage post split is just him trying to broaden the appeal of his amazon cash in. Nor does it disguise the fact that had the report not been "kept from falling into the nationalists hands" (his suggestion and the bit you keep missing,) then devolution/independence would have been a certainty on a much better financial footing.
You have read the book then? What did you think of how he explained the pros and cons on the various methods of apportioning various assets, liabilities etc?
Having led the industry and development departments for the Scottish governments that rules him out as being credible does it? The one guy who was championing an oil fund right from the start rather than as an afterthought, and we should dismiss him out of hand??? How very odd....
I hope no Scottish Uni employs/employed him given such a lack of trust, that would be terrible wouldn't it? Imagine him teaching economics or business?