Forum menu
What is SnG?
So news today that Lloyd's moves TSB from a Scottish registered company into a new holding company registered in London pre-IPO.
Pretty clear feedback from the pre-deal roadshow about how investors perceive Scottish risk.
SnG - Sons of the Gael, strange little quasi fascistic organisation as far as i could make out. Believe in a Scotland for the ethnically Scottish and want gays out of Scotland. Strange bunch.
There is a large, not massive anti Westminster sentiment,but it is just that for most,a sentiment.
So the independence (sic) movement want to replace a Westminster-centric system that works well in both design and practice (as a union) with a Brussels-centric one that works poorly due to poor design and poor practice. And then folk pretend that this is neither largely driven by being anti-Westminster or even anti-English/anti-Tory.
Bizarre.
...Or pretty clear how you desperately want to try and convince EVERYBODY about how independence is a bad idea?
MDwarf,as I said,there is a groundswell of anti-Westminster feeling that even the bloody mail is suggesting has given a boost to the yes vote,pretty much down to that well mannered no campaign.I guess it will be logical that there is an increase in the number of people who take it to being anti-English. When you see the likes of Osbourne or I'm part scotch me Dave telling us how we should be governed,that is reinforced.A flip side to a least a couple of folk posting on this very thread. We have always had fruitcakes that I would put the likes of Settler Watch, SDL(yes we do!),RIC to a lesser extent, and the group you mention,who I am not aware of into that catregory.I am not aware of it becoming much of an anti English campaign,and TBH your politicians get it tight because we have long memories when it comes to Tory PM's, I work in a very middle class enviroment,so can only comment on what I see,but even as a plasterer in the 80/90's We didn't translate that lack of warmth to Maggie to you lot. Also growing up on the East coast there has always been a lot of English folk up at the oil,uni etc.
Most folk up here adhere to the doctine of William McIlvanney,who was cheered when he told the a nationalist rally in Edinburgh that
"Scottishness isn't some pedigree lineage, it's a mongrel tradition"
edit, ah, I have heard of them. The point about gays says it all really.
Yes, there are anti-English idiots in Scotland, just as there are anti-Scottish idiots in England. To simplify the independence argument down to being anti-English ignores all the English people in Scotland who are very much in favour of independence.
I was on the independence march in Edinburgh last year, and you couldn't imagine a more diverse group of people, it was wonderful.
I agree with both Duckman and Ben. Anti English sentiment does exist in Scotland, prejudice is ugly in all its forms.
duckman - Member
...Or pretty clear how you desperately want to try and convince EVERYBODY about how independence is a bad idea?
I guess that was aimed at me, but misdirected. The yS is telling everyone that independence is a bad idea, hence the proposal of a currency union with rUK followed by integration with the EU. Both policies requiring ceding of national sovereignty.
In contrast, I would propose staying part of the UK (it works) plus greater levels of devolved powers to regional assemblies. For me, higher levels of independence is a good idea. But that requires a no vote not a yes one.
The No campaign can keep quiet when yS makes the case so eloquently!
http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/poll-currency-row-leads-to-rise-in-yes-vote-1-3313112
From today's Scotsman
The law is clearly defined should Scotland wish to stick to its guns, but there are lots of things that Scotland wants (and in the short term at least needs) according to the white paper that it isn’t strictly entitled to by law, it is in everyone’s best interests that any split is amicable, especially given that any dispute between Scotland and the UK would likely preclude Scottish membership of NATO and the EU.There is nothing stopping Scotland using a portion of its territory as a bargaining tool to secure a share of other ‘assets’ or offset debts though.
THIS Is a great somethingion of the scenario with none of having any idea how the negotiations will turn out but us all knowing what each side would prefer - though of course we know that wont happen
Having met & conversed with some members of SnG, i've no doubt there is a strong anti-English (& to be frank, racist) feeling in some Nationalists
Which is true of many nationalists - have you seen what UKIP supporters say about gay plagues for example?
It makes little sense to base your opinions on what everyone thinks by talking to extremists.
movement want to replace a Westminster-centric system that works well in both design and practice (as a union) with a Brussels-centric one that works poorly due to poor design and poor practice.
It always makes me chuckle to hear the english praise one union and bemoan another. They like the one they govern and dominate and dislike the one where they are but a noisy member ...its almost like they want to have a greater say over their own destiny and are willing to ignore the economic advantages of union to achieve this. I dont get why this contradiction is lost on them tbh
In contrast, I would propose staying part of the UK (it works) plus greater levels of devolved powers to regional assemblies.
So your solution is to make it more like the |EU union that does not work as its a bad design?
I suspect most people would prefer that within the whole union but CMD did not give them that option
[quote> http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/poll-currency-row-leads-to-rise-in-yes-vote-1-3313112
From today's Scotsman
Oh dear, that will only encourage them. This article sums it up pretty well.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/19/alex-salmond-acting-spoilt-children
Yet again, I was/am broadly in favour of independence, but the levels of hysterical BS from the yes campaign doesn't really inspire confidence that the SNP are capable of stewarding Scotland through the process.
Which is true of many nationalists - have you seen what UKIP supporters say about gay plagues for example?
It makes little sense to base your opinions on what everyone thinks by talking to extremists.
Nationalism is just a universally bad thing IMO. On some level it's all based on the idea that our people and our country are better than those lot over there.
gordimhor - Memberhttp://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/poll-currency-row-leads-to-rise-in-yes-vote-1-3313112
From today's Scotsman
So, back to the polling levels of 16 May 2013 then.
I've still no idea what the end result will be. But it's very interesting how much poll results get played upon. Even when there is often not actually that much movement.
I guess theres so much noise and points scoring going on that anything and everything is thrown up as a shift one way or the other by someone somewhere.
[quote=Junkyard ]
In contrast, I would propose staying part of the UK (it works) plus greater levels of devolved powers to regional assemblies.
So your solution is to make it more like the |EU union that does not work as its a bad design?
No - the solution is to make it more like how the EU would be if it worked. You do realise that the problem with the EU isn't the theory?
[quote=grum ]Nationalism is just a universally bad thing IMO. On some level it's all based on the idea that our people and our country are better than those lot over there.
Or more fundamentally that our country is better because I happen to have been born here.
Careful Grum, if we both post the same article that may be construed as English bullying.
n some level it's all based on the idea that our people and our country are better than those lot over there.
Not really. It's based on the idea that smaller groups are generally better than large groups. Large countries are a pretty recent invention, it's not a normal state of affairs for humanity* to live in countries of tens or hundreds of millions of people. In Elizabethan times, Britain had a population of only a few million.
It's not about our people and our country being better than that lot, it's about being just as good as that lot, so equally able to manage our own affairs.
*whatever the normal state for humanity is.
Or more fundamentally that our country is better because I happen to have been born here.
I probably know more non-Scottish-born Yes people than Scottish-born ones. This is most definitely not about where you were born, it's about where you choose to live.
[b]Actually, the problem with the EU is theory confirmed by the practice.[/b] There is no contradiction between supporting a currency union for the UK and not supporting one for the EU. It's the basic economic theory of what constitutes an optimum currency area and what doesn't. The failed practice is merely the icing in the cake.
(google Alba Lerner or Robert Mundell or simply Optimum Currency Theory/Areas)
Alternatively, The Fiscal Commission report (for yS) goes in to great detail about why Scotland and the UK satisfy the criteria for a successful and optimum currency area - hence THEIR conclusion that it is a better solution than independence of monetary, fiscal and regulatory policy. The yS campaign tells you all you need to know, its the elephant in the room. [b]According to them, Scotland is better off having monetary and fiscal policy and control of the banks handled by Westminster. [/b] Strange but true. Who needs a NO campaign?
This is most definitely not about where you were born, it's about where you choose to live.
Yep
Though my comment was about nationalism - I'm not suggesting that all yes voters are nationalists.
I suppose that depends on how you define nationalism.
Not really. It's based on the idea that smaller groups are generally better than large groups. Large countries are a pretty recent invention, it's not a normal state of affairs for humanity* to live in countries of tens or hundreds of millions of people. In Elizabethan times, Britain had a population of only a few million.
Define 'normal'. Throughout most of human history we have been in small hunter-gatherer groups haven't we? Are you suggesting we should go back to that?
It's not about our people and our country being better than that lot, it's about being just as good as that lot, so equally able to manage our own affairs.
I think it's naive (perhaps to the point of disingenuousness) to claim there isn't a hefty element of this in virtually any nationalist movement throughout history.
You do realise that the problem with the EU isn't the theory?
As we have not had a European war and have a common market it has achieved its primary goals. 😛
I have heard farages speeches that get him banned - he did not make the point you did in any of them.
FWIW all democracies look good on paper then we go and invade Iraq on a false document against the peoples wishes or a coalition govt no one voted for and you get point out the operation is poor compared to the theory. Most EU criticisms can be levelled at ANY and ALL systems.
For example unelected bureaucrats - they dont mean the head of the Bank of England its just the European ones that are bad.
IMHO most antis dislike it full stop its, like Scotland, an emotive issue about self determination and resisting outside interference [ as well as immigration as they forget how many of us are over there]
I accept your right to reply but lets not sidetracked here...lets save this one till 2016 eh
From today's Scotsman
How strange that the Scotsman omitted to report the caveat that lasts months Survation poll data analysis was weighted by recalled 2010 vote, whereas this month they’ve weighted by 2011 Holyrood vote.
A difference in measurement method that was estimated to be responsible for about five points difference in the weighting of the Yes result...
Funny that 🙄
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/19/scottish-independence-76-things-apologise
Typical dire piece from the Guardian, is it trying to be funny I've no idea. Take number 8, yes Chris Hoy is Scottish but the real story is that he is a great example of the UK coming together to win Olympic & World medals.
It was pleasant to see on the STV news the other night a bloke from the Scottish film industry ranting and raving about how disgusting it was that Pinewood is opening a new studio in Wales and not Scotland. Jesus get over yourself Scotland doesn't have divine right to companies just because it's Scotland.
Define 'normal'. Throughout most of human history we have been in small hunter-gatherer groups haven't we? Are you suggesting we should go back to that?
That's why I put in my caveat at the end. Small countries are generally simpler in terms of bureaucracy, there are fewer layers of government needed. That, I think, is a good thing.
Small countries are generally simpler in terms of bureaucracy, there are fewer layers of government needed. That, I think, is a good thing.
If anyone 'down south' said anything like that about the EU, Salmond would call them a Little Englander!
Speaking of Elephants THM, you seem strangely slow to wax lyrical on about the not-at-all scaremongering Gordon Brown lecture to the Fife pensioners about how a yes vote means they will lose their pensions as they have paid into UK NI. The sight of that man lecturing anybody about pensions is surely worth at least 2% in the opinion polls...especially if they had been in an occupation with a final salary scheme.
[quote=epicyclo ]I see there's still plenty of playing the man
Just for a couple of pages shall we say if we are to eligible and what that vote will be.
It was pleasant to see on the STV news the other night a bloke from the Scottish film industry ranting and raving about how disgusting it was that Pinewood is opening a new studio in Wales and not Scotland. Jesus get over yourself Scotland doesn't have divine right to companies just because it's Scotland.
I'd always wondered who it was that watches STV
Just for a couple of pages shall we say if we are to eligible and what that vote will be.
Uh oh
That's why I put in my caveat at the end. Small countries are generally simpler in terms of bureaucracy, there are fewer layers of government needed. That, I think, is a good thing.
Hasn't devolution in Scotland meant more layers of bureaucracy, not less?
Just for a couple of pages shall we say if we are to eligible and what that vote will be.
Left years ago, not eligible in the slightest to vote, no present intention to return, not sure what I'd vote: the UK is a train crash but otoh building a bloody tram line was hard enough, let alone a whole new country.
Does that help? 😀
I keep getting this advert over there -->
[img] 
[/img]
😀
(eligible to vote, most likely voting yes)
Fair point 😉 I never have before I was doing work on the laptop and it came on after the football and news. Yes I know I've let myself down 😉
eligible to vote, most likely voting yes
Ditto
Yes I know I've let myself down
😀
duckman - Member
Speaking of Elephants THM, you seem strangely slow to wax lyrical on about....
Keep up, that was yesterday's news and I dealt with it then. Pensions is the next in a long line of issues that are not properly dealt with. No change there.
teamhurtmore - Member
New joke for the early evening crew in this thread:Have we done pensions yet?
No, neither has Alex Salmond...
IGMC, have a good evening!
[b]POSTED 17 HOURS AGO [/b]#
[quote=bencooper ]most likely voting yes
You're not quite sure? 😯
Eligible to vote. No.
Yes for my vote.
(AND)
Pensions is the next in a long line of issues that [s]are not properly dealt with[/s] [b]the SNP can only go so far in answering the questions asked of it by the Scottish Inst of Chartered Accountants(they dealt with the first set) as Westminster has not stated it will honour the NI payments already paid.[/b] No change there.
The flip side to your (as ever) one eyed post. I thought you told us that the no campaign had stopped scaremongering?
As you quite correctly say; Scotland deserves better.
I will do THM's voting status for him...No,but fancies retiring here so wants to ensure that Scotland is still part of the UK.
THM He asked you to comment on Browns speech - I am not seeing how that is a comment and it seems to be just one of your usual digs at AS.
ust for a couple of pages shall we say if we are to eligible and what that vote will be.
TBH I like the union [ all of them not just this one] but I hate tories and its a good way of getting free from that shower.
Undecided
Why bother? You won't read my comments properly. Far better to point you towards bodies that you might be prepared to read such as ICAS* and in particular Rachel Holmes** - she and the body are still waiting for the Scottish Government to respond correctly to genuine concerns about the future of the country's pensions. You might believe her. She's been waiting for over a year. Still details are not yS big points are they? Bluff and bluster is much better.
*Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland - a body that tends to like detail!!
** seems pro "yes" but irritated by lack of detailed response from Scottish government to date and after a year of waiting.
I don't fully understand GBs comments anyway. He seems to be implying that there is an identifiable pension pot for most state pensions. How quant an idea that is.......complete bllx though. He needs to google "Ponzi scheme" perhaps?
eligible to vote. Not Scottish. Voting no.