[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

THM I am happy to admit my ignorance here, do you really think that helped me understand?

The B of E is relatively independent compared to a politician but it is still the Bank of the govt [ even if it is at arms length] The govt appoint him iirc but I dont know enough of him to know how independent or otherwise his view is

In 1998, it became an independent public organisation, wholly owned by the Treasury Solicitor[5] on behalf of the government, with independence in setting monetary policy.

It's a Scotsman what done that.

They come down here interfering with our financial arrangements....

C'mon Gordi, you are reaching kaesae standards with that line of argument.

ernie_lynch - Member
It's a Scotsman what done that.

They come down here interfering with our financial arrangements....

They did. But we're so generous you can have the whole pack of them. Brown, Blair, Darling et al...

Don't you want them ? Don't you like Scottish politicians ?

Scottish independence if it comes is going to be a rude awakening for you.

Every pro independence little Scotlander

Oh Christ on a bicycle. We're back to "your politicians" are arse holes too and "you're anti English" are we.

As for giving us words of wisdom about our rude awakening and our politicians, maybe want to get your own house in order first.

Thanks for describing my comment as words of wisdom, you're too kind, but it was epicyclo who referred to "Brown, Blair, Darling et al..." I assume the connection between them is that they are all allegedly Scottish. If he's got a problem with politicians based on their Scottishness and we "can have the whole pack of them" then it doesn't take a particularly wise person to figure out Scottish independence if it should come is going to be a rude awakening for him.

And as for me allegedly trying to insert anti English sentiment into this thread it's very clear that the case for Scottish so-called independence is being based on purely petty emotive nationalism, which is hardly surprising as no real tangible advantages can reasonably be offered.

I expect anti-Westminster not anti-English polemics, in the same way as I don't expect BNP type nationalists to publicly be critical of black people. And they're not. In fact they get very upset if you accuse them of being racist which using your logic presumably means that they can't be. But I accuse them of being racist anyway - I believe in calling a spade a spade 🙂

EDIT : Btw I [i]genuinely[/i] want to hear a powerful argument for Scottish independence, I really do, and not least because many supporting such a course of action are left-wing even by my definition of the term. But all I can find is an argument based essentially on petty emotive and meaningless nationalism, which is hugely disappointing.

And as for me allegedly trying to insert anti English sentiment into this thread it's very clear that the case for Scottish so-called independence is being based on purely petty emotive nationalism, which is hardly surprising as no real tangible advantages can reasonably be offered.

Real tangible advantages? Being able to live in a democracy is a pretty big advantage.

The Westminster system is broken. First-past-the-post means that one party can get overall control on a minority of the vote. The whip system means MPs often don't vote the way their constituents want them to. There's an unelected upper house stuffed full of political cronies. Therefore voter turnout in elections is low and getting lower - even Tony Blair, at the height of his popularity in a landslide election, only got 1-in-5 people to vote for him - and look what he managed to do with that power.

Now those issues affect everyone in the UK - Scotland is especially badly hit as, while the rest of the UK has broadly moved rightwards politically, Scotland has stayed more on the left. So often we end up with governments that very few people in Scotland voted for - the famous thing about Scotland having more pandas than Tory MPs.

So independence is simple - I want to live in a democracy, and at the moment I don't.

ernie_lynch - Member
...but it was epicyclo who referred to "Brown, Blair, Darling et al..." I assume the connection between them is that they are all allegedly Scottish. If he's got a problem with politicians based on their Scottishness and we "can have the whole pack of them" then it doesn't take a particularly wise person to figure out Scottish independence if it should come is going to be a rude awakening for him...

Your logic is more twisted than barbed wire...

But I accuse them of being racist anyway - I believe in calling a spade a spade

Slightly, risqué choice of phrase there Ernie!

Do you "really" believe that they are going to be surprised? We have all seen how discredited the deadly trio of Blair, Brown and Darling have become (although the latter is trying to re-invent himself as learned statesman). But these guys remain head and shoulders (quality wise - and that is saying something) when compared to the local alternatives. Did you watch the toe-curling debate between Sturgeon and Lamont? Or Lamont's cringing attempts to explain tax policy - a core labour policy. And these are the Scottish MPs who are at the top of their games??? La creme de la creme or the skimmed milk of the skimmed milk. Proof that being "local" does not equate to being better.

As you say, we all await a powerful argument for Scottish independence with genuine interest and some frustration that after a political career devoted to the cause, supposedly the best politician in the UK (sic) cannot lay out answers to basic questions, preferring instead to hide behind lies and the Three Bs. This has been going on for so long (hence as ducks pointed out, the stamina required) that no one can be surprised surely? Instead yS present a powerful NO argument with the desire to keep Westminster in control of the principle levers of power. You couldn't make it up.

bencooper - Member
Real tangible advantages? Being able to live in a democracy is a pretty big advantage**..So independence is simple -[b] I want to live in a democracy, and at the moment I don't[/b].

I am sure that such a comment would be "well-received" (???) by those living in truly undemocratic states.

** yes it is, we are all very fortunate.

As you say, we all await a powerful argument for Scottish independence with genuine interest

Hello? (tap, tap) Is this thing on?

There are lots of good powerful arguments for independence, you just haven't heard them - or are more likely wilfully ignoring them. Here's another - with independence, we can get rid of those horrific weapons of mass destruction, and spend the money on helping people not trying to kill them.

And we don't live in a democracy, you just think we do. We're not bad on some things - independent judiciary, mostly independent press - but on other things we're not doing particularly well.

What interests me, though, is why this bothers you so much? You seem to have a visceral hatred of the idea of Scottish independence - is keeping some of the land and 9% of the population really all that important to you? Is it an image thing?

So independence is simple - I want to live in a democracy, and at the moment I don't.

To go from a situation of no democracy to a situation of living within a democracy, which is of course an admirable goal to aim for, would require a revolution to take place. Do you honestly think that an independent Scotland will have undergone a revolution ? That all power will have changed hands ? That the people of Scotland will suddenly feel they are living in a new society ? Dream on.

For most people it will not cause one iota of change, their lives will be exactly as it was before, other than the probable slow erosion of their living standards. Power and wealth will remain in the hands of the same people and their politicians will be as disappointing as they are now. They will in fact have even less influence in decisions which effect their lives (devo max would increase the influence of Scottish voters far more than any false independence) There will be no revolution.

So don't vote for independence because life is bad and it's always going to get worse? Nice positive message, there.

This is the reason that voter registration in Scotland is at an all-time high - people who rarely saw the point in voting see the point now.

But we're so generous you can have the whole pack of them. Brown, Blair, Darling et al...

I think at this point you're going to have to cough and mark him on the English side of the ledger!

Which is the least worst option?

Here's another - with independence, we can get rid of those horrific weapons of mass destruction, and spend the money on helping people not trying to kill them.

If only (genuinely) that were true. WMD will simply still be there but you will have no control over them whatsoever (DA, DT). YS is also committed to spending EXACTLY the same % of GDP on other means of killing people. Different brand, but it still smells like coffee.

why this bothers you so much

To coin a phrase, hello (tap, tap) is this thing on? These changes and the irresponsible threats that go with them have implications for all of us. Please don't forget that in its confusion, yS is asking rUK to backstop the economy without having control over the ludicrous fiscal plans laid out in the BoD (not to mention other unfunded liabilities, policies and fairy tales). It takes an extreme level of arrogant insularity, to believe that we should not be bothered and I am sure that you can be accused of neither Ben. The answer, on reflection, is obvious....

And we don't live in a democracy, you just think we do.

I've dealt with ineffecitive Ministers who rely so heavily on their civil service team that you negotiate with the civil servant and the Minister rubber stamps it. I can't find the link at present but I think it was last week there was a debate about the Committee system, which is supposed to be the backbone of Holyrood transparency, being bypassed.

You may have a point about Blair kona. Look at what he said in his memoirs:

The Scots were notoriously prickly about the whole business.

I always thought it extraordinary: I was born in Scotland, my parents were raised there, we had lived there, I had been to school there, yet somehow – and this is the problem which nationalist sentiment unleashed – they (notice the ‘they’) contrived to make me feel alien.

Language has to be used carefully. They were incredibly sensitive to the fear that the Scottish Parliament would turn out to be a local council (which it never was). The Scottish media were a PhD dissertation about chippiness all unto themselves. They could spot a slight that to the naked eye was invisible. Once I gave an interview on why the Parliament should have tax-raising powers, in which I said: ‘If even a parish council can, why shouldn’t the Scottish Parliament?’ – which led to the headline ‘Blair compares parliament to parish council’, which even by their standards was quite some misinterpretations.

😉

You really want to live in a democracy?

Death penalty?
EU membership?
Immigration?

Maybe have a look at the polling on those issues and consider why it is that we don't live in a democracy, and if you would really prefer it if you did?

my [i]suspicion [/i] Ben is that what you really want is to limit democracy to those things where you think people will agree with you, and not to the issues you find more problematic...

You really want to live in a democracy?

Death penalty?
EU membership?
Immigration?

Maybe have a look at the polling on those issues and consider why it is that we don't live in a democracy, and if you would really prefer it if you did...

my suspicion Ben is that what you really want is to limit democracy to those things where you think people will agree with you, and not to the issues you find more problematic...

If you can pull some polling information that show Scots are in favour of the death penalty and want stricter immigration then I'll be impressed. Same for EU Membership, otherwise there wouldn't be such a big deal being made about it.

[b]My suspicion [/b]is that you know fine well that a iScotland would have a more democratic government so are attacking Ben rather than the issue at hand.

[url= http://www.scotsman.com/news/stephen-mcginty-the-death-penalty-debate-1-3050259 ]Scotsman article[/url] Can't find a poll offhand, but page 1 of google search shows a Scottish newpaper article expressing the concern, so presumably the journalist had a basis for it.

The thread momentarily went quite good for a bit there, good work from all the usual suspects to make it terrible again.

(devo max would increase the influence of Scottish voters far more than any false independence) There will be no revolution.

Correct, however it isn't on the table, nor will a no vote be met with anything other than Scotland being squeezed till the pips squeak. So therefore independence would at least give us a CHANCE to shape our own future. If this ref was on devo max THM would be wasting his bandwidth opposing it as it would be a landslide,but it isn't. A no vote by even the narrowest margin will not be seen as a suggestion to implement change(devo max) to remove the strength of the nationalists,it will mean a sucession of cuts (as history has previously shown us) as a punishment for daring to vote in a SG with an agenda. I would disagree with your summary of a post yes vote society,we have a fairly middle of the road mob in charge.Our fight against the bedroom tax is an example of a slightly softer attitude towards social care,prescriptions would be another.

Has the page layout gone wrong for everyone else or is it just me?

Yup, it's borked....As I type this I can hear the rising tide of a pupil shouting his potty mouthed head off as he is brought to my door....see ya!

The Scottish polling is clearly in favour of the Death penalty, against EU membership, and anti immigration!

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/if-scotland-were-independent-do-you-think-it-should-join-the-eu
http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/do-you-agree-or-disagree-that-sometimes-the-death-penalty-is-the-most-approriat
http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/what-are-your-views-on-immigration-to-the-uk

So, you really want more Democracy? How about a referendum on those issues eh?

I thought not! 😉

Hmm, my attempt to use italics seems to have broken the page formatting. Sorry.

The Scottish polling is clearly in favour of the Death penalty, against EU membership, and anti immigration!

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/if-scotland-were-independent-do-you-think-it-should-join-the-eu
http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/do-you-agree-or-disagree-that-sometimes-the-death-penalty-is-the-most-approriat
http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/what-are-your-views-on-immigration-to-the-uk

So, you really want more Democracy? How about a referendum on those issues eh?

I thought not!

Well, there you go. I'm either very out of touch with my fellow Scots or the polls graphics on the website aren't telling the whole story.

One thing that jumps out is that agreeing that *sometimes* the death penalty is the best option is very different from 'do you agree we should bring back the death penalty' and the immigration question relates to the UK, not an iScotland.

Tbh though, if a party want's to bring those policies into their manifesto because that's what the people want, they should do it. That's what it's about, eh?

. If this ref was on devo max THM would be wasting his bandwidth opposing it.

Hear, hear ducks. Sadly when I suggested a long time ago, that devo max might the the best solution for Scotland, I was accused on here of arrogantly telling the Scots what they should do!!! It's a funny old place STW but at least you have now squared the circle this time - a fittingly "positive" contribution.

Perhaps now you will see why I also suggest that having a vote on something that most people believe has a MUCH better alternative (and which in turn (ie the alternative) is supported (to the extent that anything factual can) by the BoD and the arguments put forward by yS AND is not (as?) detrimental to either Scotland or rUK) is, while democratic, little more than an expensive vanity project.

You may have a point about Blair kona

Perhaps the more interesting question is why so many English people want to make him feel alien...

Hear, hear ducks. Sadly when I suggested a long time ago, that devo max might the the best solution for Scotland, I was accused on here of arrogantly telling the Scots what they should do

Its brilliant to see ernie and THM try and twist this debate about how you are waiting to hear of arguments - yes you are floating voters just waiting to be persuaded?

Re democracy as Ben claims it would take some pretty amusing posting to claim that Scotland wanted this current govt or that historically [ over the last 50 years] they do not regularly get govts thatt they did not vote for. Its a fairlydcredible point to make that they want an iS so they get a government that represents their views and that UK does not achieve this
When this point is made - lets call it a fact as this is what it is- the No campaign get all shitty

bencooper - Member
Real tangible advantages? Being able to live in a democracy is a pretty big advantage**..So independence is simple - I want to live in a democracy, and at the moment I don't.
THM reply I am sure that such a comment would be "well-received" (???) by those living in truly undemocratic states.

** yes it is, we are all very fortunate.

Its not that the arguments are not out there it is when they are presented to you you give childish replies to them - in much the same way you do when I ask for information about why a currency is not an asset. Its certainly a novel pedagogical approach you have there.
Instead of doing this perhaps you could explain how scotlands democratic choice is reflected in ALL UK elections including this one. [b]Perhaps you could tell them how a govt they do not elect reigning over them is democratic and how fortunate they are to have their views ignored and get the govt that another country voted for?[/b]
You cannot hence you do this sort of guff instead-
So THM explain why Scottish democracy is best served by having governments they do not vote for - its a tricky one that is it not THM - I wish you luck in attempting it but I expect ignorance will be your tactic here as clearly an iS will get the govt scotland chooses and the UK does not ALWAYS deliver this- Yes that would be the envy of the world ...chuckles

Its brilliant to see ernie and THM try and twist this debate about how you are waiting to hear of arguments - yes you are floating voters just waiting to be persuaded?

I have no idea about THM but I have always been opposed to the break up of the UK (I support radical federalism though) My mind is firmly made up about that.

I am however perfectly prepared to listen to someone who presents a powerful argument for Scottish independence, and if it's convincing and persuasive enough I am also perfectly prepared to change my mind.

Why would that be a concept which is difficult for you to understand ? I do try my best to tailor my politics to suit what I perceive to be factually correct, there's really no point in supporting theories which you don't believe in.

EDIT : RE : "there's really no point in supporting theories which you don't believe in" the exception for that of course is when conclusions are democratically arrived at, then the decisions of the majority override personal individual opinions and I am perfectly happy to support policies/theories which I don't necessarily agree with or believe in. Democracy isn't always painless 🙂

I am however perfectly prepared to listen to someone who presents a powerful argument for Scottish independence, and if it's convincing and persuasive enough I am also perfectly prepared to change my mind.

If them getting a govt they choose is not a good enough reason then I doubt the others will work either.
Also a fan of fedaralism FWIW

I said early on this thread that the best stroke rUK made was making it all or nothing.

+1

Which makes the argument that AS is the most "astute/best" etc politician in the UK slightly far of the mark IMO. As "I also said earlier" it would actually be quite funny if the consequences for us all were not so serious. One day, all of these guys will remember that they are civil rather than self servants.

If we get a yes vote it will be a painful decade.

Indeed it will. I am glad you admitted it though. If we say these obvious things we get accused of being negative!

ernie_lynch - Member
...I am however perfectly prepared to listen to someone who presents a powerful argument for Scottish independence, and if it's convincing and persuasive enough I am also perfectly prepared to change my mind...

Why do you think the question of democracy for the Scots needs powerful arguments?

Surely the concept of democracy stands on its own feet?

The problem the No campaign is not addressing is that most Scots do not believe that their vote has any value because it is outnumbered by the SE vote.

Having a more local government may not seem like perfect solution to you, but to us it is certainly a much less worse solution, and one where we can more easily affect the views of whatever administration we choose, especially as we have proportional representation.

A Devo Max solution would have probably been an outstanding success. We would still be in the UK, and most people would have been happy with that.

There is a suspicion that the reason it was not on the table was because the UK govt does not want Scotland to have more say in its internal affairs and was relying on scaring enough people so that the full independence option failed.

teamhurtmore - Member
Which makes the argument that AS is the most "astute/best" etc politician in the UK slightly far of the mark IMO...

If AS is stupid, it is because he's a carrier of a powerful virus.

It seems to infect his opponents with far more serious effects than it has on him. 🙂

Indeed it will. I am glad you admitted it though. If we say these obvious things we get accused of being negative!

I think most of are big enough ans astute enough to know that despite everyone's best efforts (if that's indeed what we get) there will be a fairly length period of transition, including before and after the split. We're all hopeful and indeed some of us confident that after than when things have settled a bit things will be better for the majority of us.

May I also say that it's often not what you say THM, but how you say it.

One day, all of these guys will remember that they are civil rather than self servants.

Anyway could you explain why Scotland getting the govt they choose is not a compelling reason to vote for independence? Why its great democracy that they get one they dont vote for?
Your halcyon view of the UK union is at least, on this specfic issue, as distorted as his view of the aftermath . Like him you just dodge and ignore a tough question [ he calls england bullies you call me a troll] with rabble rousing rhetoric
IMHO you know you are on dodgy ground explain how that is good or not a compelling reason hence the evasion.

Imagine what you would say were AS to do this ?

A Devo Max solution would have probably been an outstanding success. We would still be in the UK, and most people would have been happy with that.

There is a suspicion that the reason it was not on the table was because the UK govt does not want Scotland to have more say in its internal affairs and was relying on scaring enough people so that the full independence option failed.

It was utter brilliance from the nationalists imo. A 3rd question would have destroyed any thought of an IS actually happening.

One day, all of these guys will remember that they are civil rather than self servants.

Excellent spot KB, you are correct. What I should have said is:

one day all of these guys will remember that they are public not self servants

one day all of these guys will remember that they are public not self servants

He is serving the public who elected him and delivering on the party's manifesto promise. Sounds fair to me.

[quote=whatnobeer ]One thing that jumps out is that agreeing that *sometimes* the death penalty is the best option is very different from 'do you agree we should bring back the death penalty'

Are you suggesting that the people in that poll are stupid? Because that's the only possibility I can see for people thinking that the death penalty is sometimes the most appropriate sentence, but that we shouldn't have the death penalty.