Forum menu
I want a Scotland that is not part of the UK. That is exactly what I want and I don't really care what flavour it comes in as I've said all along.
Well, if you could get the leader of the Yes campaign to state that very clearly and say if he agrees with everything his beloved Fiscal Commission had to say on the subject, that would be handy.And plans A&B are using sterling, plan D is using the Euro and plan C is the Cameron is a Bawbag (rather catchy name for a currency.)
Understanding.
Is a person whose deliberately deceives and lies to people for vanity purposes.
A - no
B - even worse
C - ?
D - won't exist in 5 years time
wanmankylung - Member
I want a Scotland that is not part of the UK. That is exactly what I want and I don't really care what flavour it comes in as I've said all along.
Oops, either way you are not going to have your wishes fulfilled.
I am still waiting for the SNP to tell us what not having a currency union will cost Scottish businesses. Within a day of Osborne announcement we were told it would cost rUK business £500m. Is it too much to assume that a Scottish government that cares so much for it's people would not have worked out the cost to Scotland also?
Well, if you could get the leader of the Yes campaign to state that very clearly and say if he agrees with everything his beloved Fiscal Commission had to say on the subject, that would be handy.
He has given a very clear answer many times on the question off currency. Scotland will continue to use the pound and it will more than likely be in a currency union at least for the short to medium term. It is the only logical solution for both sides.
Oops, either way you are not going to have your wishes fulfilled.
That is a moronic thing to say - a yes voted will give me exactly what I want.
Enjoy your dreams then but be ready for when you wake up.....the hangover will be long and hard.
Eh, no. That's his preference for Plan A.He has given a very clear answer many times on the question off currency. Scotland will continue to use the pound and it will more than likely be in a currency union at least for the short to medium term. It is the only logical solution for both sides.
Have you read the Fiscal Commission's Report? It discounts using Sterling in anything other than a formal currency union. That's why AS has never formally listed it as plan B - because to do so would undermine the credibility of the "experts" who recommended Plan A and so undermine the proposal itself. Just to quote it again as you must have missed it:
International evidence suggests that informal monetary unions tend to be adopted by
transition economies or small territories with a special relationship with a larger trading
partner (e.g. between the UK and Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man). Advanced
economies of a significant scale tend not to operate in such a monetary framework. Though
an option in the short-term, it is not likely to be a long-term solution.
The Fiscal Commission's Plans B and C are the Euro and a Scottish Currency.
He has given a very clear answer many times on the question off currency. Scotland will continue to use the pound and it will more than likely be in a currency union at least for the short to medium term. It is the only logical solution for both sides.
And you claim others are talking utter shite and being moronic?
No they are not. Go away and read it.
THM - remember a couple of years ago you said that the Euro was on its way out and that Germany and Greece would be leaving it?
Read the FC stuff several times. Have you? Here's something else to read
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/16d54dd4-237a-11e4-8e29-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=uk#slide0
When not if....it's simple. Tell me about the democratic process in Italy? Actually don't, better that you have sweet dreams with innocent dreams.
I have, dry though it is. Have it open right now if you could point me to the bit where they recommend any informal use of sterling.No they are not. Go away and read it
That rejection of it which I quoted, by the way, is para 20 on page 4 of the Feb 2013 report.
At least the DO is not alone in talking shite. Swinney has also been at it. Yet another yS bit of nonsense requiring the BOE to make an announcement saying that they (yS) are telling porkies (again!!)
OB, mentioned it a few pages back. The DOs latest stunt was dismissed in one short para by the FIscal Commission. Not even worth discussing by his own advisers because it is a BS solution. But Wanman...reckons it's a goer!
THM - are you realistically expecting an educated man to accept what is written in the media?
What is a DO?
What is a DO?
Is a person who deliberately deceives and lies to people for vanity purposes. Best avoided at all costs.
Ah - so it's a David Osborne. I get it now.
Deceitful One, I think. As in Salmond for THM.
Jeez, if THM isn't being paid by Project Fear for his sneerathon, he's the closest thing they've got to a grassroots campaign.
Oh! Does he have a vote?
34 days to go.
THM - are you realistically expecting an educated man to accept what is written in the media?
Read Wings Over Scotland if you really want a laugh.
We get currency union for being in the UK. Seeing some argue for it, and other aspects of a successful UK, while berating it at every turn reminds me of the "What did the Romans do for us?" Sketch in The Life of Brian.
The wee blue book from WoS. was posted by Ben a few pages back and filed under fiction/comedy.
Hilarious. Talking of which, funny that no one talks about that 600+ pages of tripe anymore. That was worth the money and trees!!!
Jeez, if THM isn't being paid by Project Fear for his sneerathon, he's the closest thing they've got to a grassroots campaign.
Nah, it's my daily amusement fix and I like the xK posts!!
Oh! Does he have a vote?34 days to go.
^sneerathon.
I like the addition of these pleasant countdowns also.
I still find it hard to believe that so many people think that Scottish politicians in a Scottish Parliament will be any different from UK politicians in our current parliament. Power tends to attract all the wonderful spin doctors and lobby groups that the yes people think are so bad in Westminster but wait who is AS's best mate? Rupert Murdock???
I believe most of how we make rules and govern our countries seems to comes from our culture. A good example of this would be Russia. They have had several different ideologies running the country but at the end of the day the politicians seems to rule in the same way. Socialism works in the Scandinavian countries as they have a very deep culture of equality [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante ](see jantes law)[/url].
The accent changes from Kent to Cape Wrath but the real difference is how wealthy the south is compared to the rest of the country. Culturally Britain is quite similar. Don't give me the rubbish that the north of England and Scotland is more socialist. Socialism just does not work in our culture as we are too dam selfish or to put it in a better light too self reliant and don't do group think. We vote for Labour as we are poor and they will hopefully look after us.
I like the bit in the wee blue book where someone says
"Liverpool and Manchester did not vote for the Tories either, will they be stuck with them?"
"Well yes but remember they are just cities, we are a country!" Comes the reply.
Solidarity my Liverpool and Manchester brothers and sisters. Good luck with the Tories I have some oil money to spend. 😉
Well, two answers to that:
1. Scotland isn't abandoning you to the Tories, Scottish voted haven't decided an election since the War. The most we've done is produce a ConLibDem coalition instead of a Tory government, not a big difference.
2. If Liverpool and Manchester want to form a union, elect themselves a parliament, then they can hold a referendum themselves and declare independence.
The wee blue book from WoS. was posted by Ben a few pages back and filed under fiction/comedy.
Yes, I know you don't like the [url= http://wingsoverscotland.com/weebluebook/ ]Wee Blue Book[/url] or the White Paper. Problem is, you haven't yet said what you think is a trustworthy source of information, and why you think those sources aren't reliable. The WBB mostly references UK government or Better Together sources, after all.
athgray - Member
^sneerathon.I like the addition of these pleasant countdowns also.
Yup, I apologise for that. THM is getting a bit wearing, but that's no excuse.
The countdown is to inject a bit of reality. It's the one sure fact in the whole debate. 🙂
You're kidding, right? First thing I did before reading WBB was look at the sources as they're listed. Press reports are about half the sources, including the Daily Mail. Second most popular source is Wikipedia. UK Govt / Better Together are way down the list - Wings over Scotland is quoted as a source as often as UK Govt. The reliance on press reports for so much material does undermine the "all the press is biased against us" claim.WBB mostly references UK government or Better Together sources, after all
Hi folks, have been following this thread off and on for the last few weeks.I notice that the monarchy has been left out of the many topics covered. Is the removal of the queen as titular head of state the deal breaker for the Yes vote ? Why just go for independance but appear to give up the chance to become a Republic.
I ask this question as a republican myself who wishes we were citizens and not subjects.
I see that as a separate issue - if we later wanted to become a republic, we could elect a party that would do that.
You're kidding, right? First thing I did before reading WBB was look at the sources as they're listed. Press reports are about half the sources, including the Daily Mail.
Yes, and that's deliberate - it'd be easy to back stuff up with SNP press releases and reports from the few (one) friendly newspapers, but instead it's backed up with stuff even the Daily Mail would print.
Is the removal of the queen as titular head of state the deal breaker for the Yes vote ? Why just go for independance but appear to give up the chance to become a Republic.
It's not really an issue for most folk I've spoken to. Some have a feeling one way or the other when pressed, but in the grand scheme of things, it's a minor concern. SNP policy is to keep the queen and if the Scottish people want to become a Republic in the future they can have a vote on it.
carlossal - Member
Hi folks, have been following this thread off and on for the last few weeks.I notice that the monarchy has been left out of the many topics covered. Is the removal of the queen as titular head of state the deal breaker for the Yes vote ?...
I think the rationale is it's a process of slow disentanglement.
Scotland and England were united under the crown for the 100 years before the parliaments merged, so the independence we will shortly have will bring us back to that position.
A lot of us would quite happily see the elimination of the monarchy but that is a matter for another day maybe, or perhaps we just keep it going.
Seem then that SNP want to keep the "best" bits of UK because it suits them to get the votes they want. Despite as stated being a republican myself I don't think the vote would be Yes if it was for a complete independance ( Not sure what Lizzies role is in current Scottish set up). The great British Public (inc all 4 nations) seem rather sentimental with regards to the monarchy.
It was a Scottish king who united the crowns, 100 years before the parliaments were joined. We don't want to keep the "best" bits, we want to share the bits that are ours.
And good luck telling the Queen she's not allowed to come to Balmoral any more.
And good luck telling the Queen she's not allowed to come to Balmoral any more.
Why would becoming a republic stop the Queen going to Balmoral?
Even if you were a Republic, then the Queen would still own Balmoral. It is not owned by the Crown.
Possibly more apathetic than sentimental given the monarchy is, practically, powerless.The great British Public (inc all 4 nations) seem rather sentimental with regards to the monarchy.
Replacing a Monarch with an elected President as Head of State carries risk given the generally negative view of politicians. Would you get a Mary Robinson or a Nicolas Sarkozy? Would Tony Blair have made it to President had he run for that office after retiring as PM? And given what little the Queen does, what would an elected President do?
bencooper - MemberWe don't want to keep the "best" bits, we want to share the bits that are ours.
Except the oil. 😉
Yes, okay, I was kidding about that - never threaten a woman with shotguns and small yappy dogs 😉
Balmoral is the private property of the monarchy,so unless you were going to do a'Land Grab' you could'nt stop her visiting.
Except the oil.
Happy to share the oil - the oil that's in English territorial waters is England's, the oil that's in Scotland's waters is Scottish.
Balmoral is the private property of the monarchy,so unless you were going to do a'Land Grab' you could'nt stop her visiting.
Well I think all the big highland estates should be compulsorily purchased and given to the nation or local communities. But that's a different issue.
Tried putting 'winky'emoticon at end off last post as not serious proposal. Bloomin' phone didn't like it though. "Smart phone", my posterior!!
Actually Ben, if you go back to page twelve, you'll recall that you proposed sharing the oil on a population basis
Everything gets shared that way - assets, liabilities, things where no-one can agree if they're assets or liabilities, everything. It's the only fair way to do it.
😈
I'm sure I've stated many times that things which are distributed geographically should be shared geographically. Otherwise I want 9% of Snowdonia 😉