Just think, in 24 hours the people of Scotland will be sovereign for the first time in history.
Or half will be sulking, gut feel says the undecided my go no and some will get some performance anxiety/stage fright and vote no.
I at least hope the turnout is in the high 70's or above. It should really be mandatory to vote in these sort of things.
no will still win by about 4% [ 46% - 54% - arguing over whether that is 4% or 8% could be todays off topic topic ;-)]
In what way is that oppression? I'm unimpressed that free prescriptions here means less money available to help those who can't help themselves. Likewise, one of my kids is about to get free school meals. Why? I can and should afford both.it's about the fact that England, Wales and NI are oppressed in the shape of prescription charges, education charges
Little is or isn't affordable in absolute terms. It is just that if you spend it on one thing you can't spend it on another. So Scotland is spending money giving me free prescriptions and free school meals I don't need. Which means someone somewhere who needs something isn't getting it.And don't give me any crap that they aren't affordable
How's that helping social equality?
Then when we don't get the Devo Max,that is/isn't promised it will be close enough to do it all again.
I don't really think the prescription thing is such a big deal
Last I heard figures was that most people in England were exempt from the charges anyway. I am - purely because I need to take Levothyroxine every day so now all my prescriptions are free regardless of what they are for.
rather than agreeing with bean counters that pepper us with scare stories.
Aka people who know what they are talking about.
This what really pisses me off here. People generating their own useless spin, never mind the politicians, to justify what they fancy. It's not debate, it's just confirming your own bias.
Independence is not the change you need, and it's not the change the UK needs. It's just lashing out at the nearest thing.
2012-13 was over 90% free. Scotland issued nearly 99M prescriptions last year. 10% of those being paid for would have given the Government c. £80M at English charging rates. Maybe they didn't need it.Last I heard figures was that most people in England were exempt from the charges anyway
molgrips - MemberIndependence....
.....It's just lashing out at the nearest thing.
Having to rely on the media (both mainstream and social) for my insights into the thoughts behind the voting, it does seem that there's a large helping of random aspirational hopefulness/bitter anglophobia in the decision making.
As neither side have made a convincing case for significant majority support it is a pity that an important decision like this will be decided by a few 100,000 tweet followers or FB 'likers'
What could have been a major milestone in political debate/social revolution seems to have degenerated into mere tokenism.
With apologies to the "real Scots" who don't appear on soundbite TV, post on social media or frequent online forums of course 😉
What could have been a major milestone in political debate/social revolution seems to have degenerated into mere tokenism.
Hilldodger, you're falling on Ewan Morrison territory here:
[i]The shopping list of ‘positive’ ideal goals could never tally up, the desires of the Yessers were incompatible and contradicted each other, but to raise this was seen as being ‘negative’. Every kind of Yes had to be included, and this meant there could be no debate. Instead there was a kind of self-censorship and conformism...
...I learned then that if you keep a promise of a better society utterly ambiguous it takes on power in the imagination of the listener. Everything can be better “after the revolution”. It’s a brilliant recruitment tool because everyone with all their conflicting desires can imagine precisely what they want.
[/i]
Aka people who know what they are talking about.
Bless them for the guidance and insights without them we would be lost and we would experience recessions and stuff like that.
Aye poor souls, concerned about everything bar their own bank accounts and siphoning off as much of societies wealth as they can.. 🙄 No self interest there what so ever.Junkyard - lazarus
Aka people who know what they are talking about.
Bless them for the guidance and insights without them we would be lost and we would experience recessions and stuff like that.
Anyhow, I'm done with this thread, happy voting everyone! 🙂
Some of us bean counters predicted what would happen, but a bit like the YES campaign, weren't listened to because it didn't fit with populist thinking. "scaremongering" was a word bandied around then too but we know how well that went.Bless them for the guidance and insights without them we would be lost and we would experience recessions and stuff like that.
Independence is not the change you need, and it's not the change the UK needs. It's just lashing out at the nearest thing.
Whoaaaa, what's the world coming to - I finally agree wholeheartedly with Molgrips here?
Grass is always greener and all that. Happy voting guys.
oldbloke - Member
Bless them for the guidance and insights without them we would be lost and we would experience recessions and stuff like that.
Some of us bean counters predicted what would happen, but a bit like the YES campaign, weren't listened to because it didn't fit with populist thinking. "scaremongering" was a word bandied around then too but we know how well that went.
In a, fnar fnar, my bank account is extremely large, this can't possibly continue kind a way I'd imagine! 😆
toodaloo! 😀
[i]Anyhow, I'm done with this thread, happy voting everyone! [/i]
Yeah right! 😉
I'm still going for 60% 'No' vote. I'm very rarely wrong about anything. 8)
Some of us bean counters predicted what would happen, but a bit like the YES campaign, weren't listened to because it didn't fit with populist thinking. "scaremongering" was a word bandied around then too but we know how well that went.
Same issue in Australia if your view don't fit the plan your wrong
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-17/costello-says-australias-economic-luck-is-running-out/5751286
Thought you were going.In a, fnar fnar, my bank account is extremely large, this can't possibly continue kind a way I'd imagine!
But no, your uninformed prejudice is showing through a bit there. I'm an accountant. I looked at Gordon Brown's numbers. They didn't add up. It really wasn't that hard to see so my main irritation with the Tories is that they didn't challenge that hard enough.
and if the Yes side was looking for another nutcase we can loan you one
Senator Bernardi said Scottish independence would give the country a fresh opportunity."There is an opportunity for it to pursue a different path than perhaps the many other Western European nations which have been hamstrung by bureaucracy and high taxation," he said.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-17/bernardi-backs-scottish-independence-despite-abbotts-stance/5751198
One from the real bonkers right...
I suppose you don't need to count beans if you've been promised a big bag of magic beans...
@kona - top post !
I'm still going for 60% 'No' vote. I'm very rarely wrong about anything.
@Rockape I see we share that quality 🙂 On another website what I frequent my signature is "often wrong, seldom in doubt"
I think the actual vote will be fascinating, either a narrow Yes or a clear No.
Good luck to all and best wishes. As her Majesty said Think carefully
As her Majesty said Think carefully
I don't need someone who only got her job by an accident of birth telling me how to think, thanks 😉
I think Dundee might be a bit grumpy if there's a No
I see today John Swinney described the economic crises as "Westminster's recession"
Hum, the one overseen by a Scottish chancellor/prime minister from the long serving government the Scots did vote for, the one who's greatest costs came from rescuing two Scottish run banks who had over extended themselves massively. Nice re-branding attempt John.
@ben the SNP aren't daft, they know the Royal family are popular in Scotland and they bring in lots of tourist revenue. Her Majesty will be offering carefully chosen words of advice whichever way the vote goes.
I don't need someone who only got her job by an accident of birth telling me how to think, thanks
Nope, far better to be told how to think by someone who's got (a not so) hidden agenda to become the new PM of Scotland and who got to where they are by bullying, promising the moon on a stick, and pulling the wool over peoples eyes!
[img] https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTXwawktccZg5nQIE_nEWY1dHL3w7HVeLNMIiZBqd0aDn_hRLPi [/img]
Senator Bernardi said Scottish independence would give the country a fresh opportunity.
"There is an opportunity for it to pursue a different path than perhaps the many other Western European nations which have been hamstrung by bureaucracy and high taxation," he said.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-17/bernardi-backs-scottish-independence-despite-abbotts-stance/5751198
One from the real bonkers right...
He is certainly loopy, but...if iScotland exists, its first premier is likely to be an ex-banker Tartan Tory. And more than that, a premier who's going to have a civil service in flux and with administrative blind spots, and who's going to need to procure a shitload of goods and services simultaneously in the middle of a recession/stagnation/whatever. He's already promised to cut corporation taxes. He could easily end up as every bank, consultancy and business process outsourcing provider's bitch.
There's an assumption that iScotland will be some sort of soft socialist republic - but thats an assumption based on nothing. It's just as likely to end up as a rightwing low tax mini state like Estonia.
An independent Scotland is going to have more bureaucracy per head than does the UK as it replicates all the shared services. As Salmond cuts corporation tax to attract and retain business he is going to have to raise taxes substantially elsewhere to meet all the transition/replication expenses and to support this fairer society people seem to believe he can create.
Bless them for the guidance and insights without them we would be lost and we would experience recessions and stuff like that.
Oh give me a break. Because some reckless self interested lenders lined their pockets, that means everyone who is involved in anything economic or financial is always wrong? FFfS that is brainless. You might as well allege that all doctors are evil because of Shipman.
I don't need someone who only got her job by an accident of birth telling me how to think, thanks
Argh! This is exactly what I am talking about, idiotic spin to bolster your own position. She's an old lady with a lot of experience giving some very sound and neutral advice. It's not telling you how to think, but suddenly you take the accident of her birth and twist it to make jt into your own propaganda.
You should be properly ashamed of that. Very very poor.
Nope, far better to be told how to think by someone who's got (a not so) hidden agenda to become the new PM of Scotland and who got to where they are by bullying, promising the moon on a stick, and pulling the wool over peoples eyes!
Is that better or worse than being told what to think by randoms on an internet forum?
What we're discovering with this referendum is that telling people what to think isn't working any more - there's no Yes-supporting daily newspapers, the TV news is biased towards the Union, yet people are reading up, talking to each other, and making their own minds up.
She's an old lady with a lot of experience giving some very sound and neutral advice.
And why is her advice more important than that of many other elderly women? She's a nice person I'm sure. But I refuse to be deferential to her.
It's not any more important! No-one said it was!
Oh give me a break. Because some reckless self interested lenders lined their pockets, that means everyone who is involved in anything economic or financial is always wrong? FFfS that is brainless. You might as well allege that all doctors are evil because of Shipman.
Don't forget all those people who borrowed more than their house was worth and invested recklessly 🙂
yet people are reading up, talking to each other, and making their own minds up.
You seem to be entirely ignorant of how people's minds work in peer groups!
People are reading things starting with a preconceived viewpoint and then finding reasons to dismiss the other side to confirm that viewpoint. Happening on this thread, happening everywhere. I include myself.in that, but at least I'm aware and trying to avoid it.
She's an old lady with a lot of experience giving some very sound and neutral advice.
A hahahahahahaha! Classic molgrips! What a ledge
Her advice was to think carefully. How can anyone argue with that? Are you saying people should not think?
You seem to be entirely ignorant of how people's minds work in peer groups!
Against the might of the media and government spin, it's remarkable that Yes has got anywhere - that's not down to peer group pressure, if it was then the polls would have started off much closer together and we'd now be looking at a solid Yes win.
If anything, No was the peer group pressure option - we're still seeing that today with Labour's "If you don't know, vote No" slogans. People start off as No, it's a default thing, but once they have time to think about it and do their own research they shift to Yes.
It's not any more important! No-one said it was!
Why mention her, then? "Ethel Smith of 37 Greenlees Avenue, Skegness, says she thinks everyone should think carefully about what they're doing"
The whole point of mentioning the Queen is to make people think that they should be interested in what she thinks.
Is that better or worse than being told what to think by randoms on an internet forum?
@ben, welcome back - as you can see things haven't changed much since you've been away. Sadly AS has far more profile and influence than all of us internet randoms put together. It is hugely ironic to many of us that by a country mile the most deceitful self interested politician in this debate is AS as he keeps pushing the big lie of the "Westminster elite" and a promise of utopia.
The whole point of mentioning the Queen is to make people think that they should be interested in what she thinks.
But do you not think she is the ultimate neutral ? She will still be Queen, Scotland will be in the Commonwealth.
Why mention her, then?
Because it was something that was heard and was good advice. Plus I didn't mention her. I was simply pointing out the idiocy of discounting someone's advice based on that person's birth is rather than its merit.
People start off as No
No they don't, but that's more meaningless guff trying to make Yes look more attractive by appealing to emotions. Did you work in advertising before your current job? People change to yes once they've heard enough emotive bullshit*
* see I can do it too
Nice to see Ben already queued up on the 'it was the biased media' bandwagon for why Yes are about to lose
Nothing to do with shite planning, economic illiteracy and downright lies - its all the medias fault 🙄
Sadly AS has far more profile and influence than all of us internet randoms put together.
True, but he has a lot less than Cameron, Clegg or Miliband - a glance at the media on any given day will tell you that.
But do you not think she is the ultimate neutral ?
Perhaps - I doubt she has as much direct experience of food banks as she has of polo, so I don't think she is unbiased or neutral, but she does a good impersonation of being so.
However, that makes it even more nonsensical to mention her. It's like those Father Ted "Careful Now" signs. What message is mentioning the Queen supposed to give?
I mentioned the Queen. It is relevant for the reasons we mentioned and because Salmond ha said she would remain Queen of an independent Scotland.
Back to EU membership then - looks like the Spanish won't let any of the ScotGovt proposed easy shortcuts happen. Going to have to do it the long way.
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29234242 ]Spanish PM says Scotland would have to reapply to join EU as a new member state[/url]
If anything, No was the peer group pressure option - we're still seeing that today with Labour's "If you don't know, vote No" slogans. People start off as No, it's a default thing, but once they have time to think about it and do their own research they shift to Yes.
Either 50% are not doing any research or you're only half right there 🙂
Either 50% are not doing any research or you're only half right there
Maybe. There's a lot of cultural inertia there, from people who have only known the UK their whole lives. That might be behind the age split - the over-65 age group is the only group that's backing No. That age group is also the least likely to be able to access other forms of discussion - less able to use the internet, less likely to go out to meetings.
they shift to Yes.
But what about those who were Yes and have moved to No. Are they "wrong"? As you said people do their own research and reach a conclusion. Not everyone chooses "Yes" so by definition the argument for an iS does not satisfy all voters.
