[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

The English are unenthusiastic about devolution for themselves.

I wonder why? Lack of such distinct regional identities? My father is from Lancashire, his sister moved to Yorkshire, I don't think that's true. Mistrust of government, leading to the idea that more government is bad?

Lack of such distinct regional identities?

You don't get out much do you 😉

That's what I meant about the Yorkshire vs Lancashire thing 😀

[i]The rest of the UK does not "support" Scotland - Scotland pays more into the union than we get back.[/i]

North sea oil drilling only started in the 1960s so the rest of the UK had been subsiding Scotland for about 250 years. Scotland finally gets a chance to pay the rest of the UK back and rather than do that greed sets in and they want to keep all their oil money for themselves. A very strange kind of socialism the SNP preach.

Really? Before oil there was coal, and heavy industry. Oh, and fishing. And soldiers more than happy to fight for the empire.

UK had been subsiding Scotland for about 250 years.

Can you explain that please, and enlighten us with some evidence?.

Gordimhor, I suppose the UK governments position on prenegotiating terms of independence would be a categorical no. Off course nobody is stupid enough to think they will or should.

And yet they slam the Yes campaign for not providing clear facts about what will happen. Cameron was saying it again yesterday, that people should be given all the facts. Well, why doesnt he go and get some more facts, or sit down and negotiate and help provide some clarity?

Because every time people hear the facts (or opinions or balancing arguments or whatever) they move towards Yes. Every time there's a town hall meeting, there's a poll taken before and after the meeting, and the shift is always towards Yes. Always.

The No campaign don't want voters to be informed, or to even hear debate. That's why the No campaign don't want to debate anyone from the Yes campaign, it's why the Better Together meetings are invitation-only.

bencooper - Member
Because every time people hear the facts (or opinions or balancing arguments or whatever) they move towards Yes.

😀 😀

Is that personal experience Ben. Or do you have verifiable evidence to support it?

Or do you have verifiable evidence to support it?

Define "verifiable" - local Yes campaigns are holding regular town hall meetings, and they usually tweet the poll results. Now because it's a Yes meeting (though open to all), you'd expect the entry poll to be skewed towards Yes. But the exit polls always move further towards Yes.

I'm sure someone somewhere has been documenting all these local polls.

ver·i·fy transitive verb \?ver-?-?f?\
: to prove, show, find out, or state that (something) is true or correct

In this case, more than one fella on the internet saying it's the case will suffice.

While I'm looking for verification

North sea oil drilling only started in the 1960s so the rest of the UK had been subsiding Scotland for about 250 years

Evidence please?

A lazy wiki suggests

The Industrial Revolution[edit]
During the Industrial Revolution, Scotland became one of the commercial, intellectual and industrial powerhouses of the British Empire.[58] Beginning about 1790 the most important industry in the west of Scotland became textiles, especially the spinning and weaving of cotton, which flourished until the American Civil War in 1861 cut off the supplies of raw cotton; the industry never recovered. However, by that time Scotland had developed heavy industries based on its coal and iron resources. The invention of the hot blast for smelting iron (1828) had revolutionized the Scottish iron industry, and Scotland became a centre for engineering, shipbuilding, and locomotive construction. Toward the end of the 19th century steel production largely replaced iron production.

Fair enough - had a quick look and the Yes campaign don't seem to be collecting the results. If I get really bored, I'll tabulate the results. Of course it relies on the people from the local Yes campaigns tweeting the results accurately.

local Yes campaigns are holding regular town hall meetings, and they usually tweet the poll results. Now because it's a Yes meeting (though open to all), you'd expect the entry poll to be skewed towards Yes. But the exit polls always move further towards Yes

So, you take a load of people, put them in a room and give them an hour of 'yes' propaganda*, and surprise surprise, it sways their opinion towards 'yes'

*'Yes' propaganda - not my words, the words of those interviewed after one such meeting:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26558087

"It was good to hear other people's point of view, but it was basically a propaganda meeting.
"It would be good if the 'No' and the 'Yes' campaigns could get on the same platform and come to towns."

"The leaflet dropped through the door and I thought I don't really know what is going on," she said.
"I need to go and find out for myself to make a decision. I will go to a 'No' meeting to hear what they have to say."

I agree with you, the actual numbers don't mean much - but the shift from No to Yes is still important.

And good luck finding a debate with both sides on the same platform - the No campaign just prevaricates and refuses. In Glasgow, Yes Glasgow spent ages asking the No campaign for a debate, with excuse after excuse, they even crowdfunded it to pay for the hall and everything, but No still refused to show up.

And even finding a No-only event will be tricky - they aren't holding very many public meetings at all.

Billboard adverts starting to appear, by the way - this was brilliant:

[img] [/img]

That white building on the right? Johann Lamont's constituency office 😀

Tugs on the heart strings doesn't it. I await the regular defacing of better together posters.

I think she's based in 'The Wedge, Barrhead road'

You were promised a currency union by dear leader. Wait until that promise is broken.

Don't agree with CMD but I would trust him a lot more than AS, who I feel to be one of the most loathsome politicians around.

Yes' propaganda - not my words, the words of those interviewed after one such meeting

What do you expect from the Yes campaign - Balance? Neutrality? Its obvious what you are going to get at a Vote yes meeting tbh....Ben and his mates basically 😉
As noted it is the no campaign who wont do joint ventures not the Yes but I think we all agree public debates with all sides makes more sense

Lack of such distinct regional identities? My father is from Lancashire, his sister moved to Yorkshire, I don't think that's true. Mistrust of government, leading to the idea that more government is bad?

What they see is - do you want another level of politicians with next to no powers ?

Surprisingly the answer is no not really.
Were they offered devo max or some such there may be some interest but it would largely be a North south divide IMHO

@athgray

We all know that if meaningful devo max is on the table it would blow independence out of the water.

I have already mentioned dear leaders clutch on power whilst other parties flounder. Even this will diminsh in 10 to 15 years. For the future after that who knows, however we may wish to take a cursory glance towards the Ukraine.

Indeed they are both tosspots not despots 😉

Post of the day!

[quote=bencooper ]Because every time people hear the facts

[quote=bencooper ]local Yes campaigns are holding regular town hall meetings

🙄

The No campaign are perfectly free to come along to these meetings and have a debate. They don't. The No campaign are asked to participate in debates involving both sides. They don't.

What are they afraid of? If the No case is so strong, why not share it with people?

Perhaps you and THM could do a tour together?

Only if I can be the non-talking keyboard player.

Only if I can be the non-talking keyboard player.

Or Scot Sell.

The latest ComRes poll puts UKIP in first place in England on 33% - and last place in Scotland on 6%.

That's why we need independence.

What % does the SNP get in England?

Dunno, but http://ukpollingreport.co.uk

Has UKIP at 16% from today's comres poll, 30% for Europe only. I take it they gain an extra 3% for discounting Scotland.

Oh please can the snp get over 50% in the polls and then the nats wouldn't be p!ssing in the wind. Our time is wasted arguing with the English who are stealing our(your) oil, why can't we convince enough of our fellow jocks to vote for the braveheart cause? Is it because we were born to subservience? The answer is yes, Scotland was not a going cause prior to 1707 and nothing has changed since.

Trolltastic

The "jocks" is what turns it into art.

What % does the SNP get in England?

Thanks piemonster. I try.

I hope the scots get independence purely as that will hopefully be the end if it. Im sick of hearing about it. If a no vote comes it will never end. I dont mind if Scotland fails ir flourishes on its own as long as they give it a rest 🙂

I'd have a lot more respect for the Yes campaign if they came out and admitted that trying to share the Pound would be a stupid idea, rather than endlessly repeating discredited [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-26600888 ]bluff and bluster[/url].

AS had to keep lying (notice his continued reference to currency as an asset this morning) and deceit until his advisors have come up with plan C. It must be very embarassing for him, poor guy. Still people still swallow this guff so he knows his audience.....

Can we try why the currency is not an asset

A link will do Google provides info on asset class and Bitcoins in the main

Indeed he does know his audience [they dont get it , most of us dont hence why I have asked] in much the same way Cameron gave an incredibly vague comment about more devolution for the floating voters which i doubt he will even try to deliver never mind whether he could.

As will blame bully rUK afterwards so she cannot really lose.
IS it great politics or woeful ....its the former if not laudable.

I can see only one way to sort this, ala russia and ukraine method, bring all those who want to stay in UK into the southern part of Scotland and send all the seperatists further north to play braveheart

Can we try why the currency is not an asset

Imagine the oil price suddenly spikes upwards. Scotland becomes awash with oil money, and the economy starts overheating. House prices start rising, people start borrowing more money, and the government starts wondering how they can keep this from getting out of control.

Meanwhile in the rUK, a net oil importer, things are not so pretty. Companies are going under as fuel prices drive up costs. People are losing their houses, and the government starts worrying about what they can do.

Should the Bank of England:

(a) raise interest rates to prevent an asset bubble followed by a crash in Scotland
(b) reduce interest rates to ease the pressure on home owners and businesses in rUK
(c) dither?

Junky - the 'pound' is not an asset, because it can't be traded onward - its value is intangible

You could sell me your name, but you couldn't sell me 'being you' - because that lies inherent in the respect that other people give you through knowledge of you and your history and background

So, your name would be a tradable asset - like 'gordon ramsey' would be - but if I bought the name 'gordon ramsey' it wouldn't make me into him.

I could use the name with his permission for trading purposes, and I could devalue it in the process by selling cheap crap under his name, but I still couldn't 'be' him, I could even run up loads of debt by signing cheques left right and centre that I couldn't pay for, and that would also devalue his reputation - so there is a significant risk to him if he let me use his name, and he might well end up having to settle those debts to recover his own reputation - it could go the other way, there could be a big scandal where it turns out he never did any cooking himself, and his reputation would be damaged, which would effect the value to me of his name.

but all the time the 'inherent value' in gordon ramsey (or the pound) remains an abstract that relies on him being him, and not something that could be traded.